"fv- 


$  A 

OF    T11K 

?(D3®IL(D3Q<3&iL  SBQMU&iaV, 

AT 

PRINCETON,   N.  .J. 


DO  3W  -A.  T  X  €  J  .-V        <  »   1.- 

SAMUEL    AG  NEW, 

OF     PHILADELPHIA,     PA 


rilB 

( '(ISC, 


SfoswcJj  J2cfr£~J§5f 


Shelf,  >.Vsi<3J      | 


■■'• 


HISTORY 


ISRAELITISH  NATION, 


ABRAHAM  TO  THE  PRESENT   TIME, 

DERIVED  FROM  THE  ORIGINAL  SOURCES, 

BY  ISAAC  M.  WISE. 

(Deutr.  xxxii,  7.)    th-yi  nut?  )T2  dSi^t  niD1  idt 

VOL.   I. 


ALBANY: 

J.  MUNSELL,  78  STATE  STREET. 
1854. 


Entered, 

According  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1853, 

By  Isaac  M.  "Wise, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States,  for  the 

Northern  District  of  New  York. 


:" -"■'■■ 


PREFACE. 


The  history  of  a  people  who  saw  the  rise  and  decline  of  all 
the  empires  of  antiquity,  and  still  stands  unmoved  and 
unchanged  among  the  nations,  must  be  interesting  to  every 
friend  of  historical  truth,  and  welcome  to  every  inquiring 
mind.  It  teaches  a  grand  lesson  of  the  course  of  Providence, 
and  directs  the  mind  to  an  imperceptible  power  which  governs 
the  destinies  of  nations. 

Such  a  nation  is  Israel  only.  It  has  seen  Assyria,  Babylo- 
nia and  Persia  in  the  days  of  their  pride  and  of  their  downfall. 
It  witnessed  the  advent,  conquests,  and  death  of  Alexander. 
It  saw  Egypt  and  Syria  play  their  parts  on  the  stage  of  his- 
tory, to  be  finally  obliterated  from  the  nomenclature  of  nations. 
It  saw  Sparta  and  Athens  flourish  and  wither;  saw  Tyre  and 
Zidon,  Carthage  and  Alexandria,  send  their  fleets  to  the  most 
distant  habitations  of  mankind,  and  it  saw  them  shrink  to 
insignificance.  It  was  a  civilized  nation  when  Romulus  marked 
the  spot  where  afterwards  proud  Rome  should  sit  upon  her  seven 
hills,  the  queen  of  the  world.  It  witnessed  the  rise,  decline, 
and  overthrow  of  gigantic  Rome.  The  nations  of  antiquity 
rolled  away  in  the  current  of  ages,  Israel  alone  remained  an 
indestructible  edifice  of  gray  antiquity,  inscribed  with  the 
enigmatical  characters  of  the  distant  history  of  primitive  ages, 
and  preserved  by  an  internal  and  marvelous  power.     It  saw  the 


IV  PREFACE. 

barbarous  nations  pour  their  unnumbered  hosts  into  the  Roman 
empire,  and  made  its  home  on  the  Thames,  the  Seine,  theEbro, 
the  Po,  and  the  Danube.  It  flourished  with  the  Saracens,  and 
suffered  in  the  obscure  and  fanatical  days  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
It  saluted  joyously  the  dawning  light  of  science,  art,  civilization 
and  justice,  and  cheered  vehemently  the  birth  of  liberty  and 
independence  in  America,  and  the  resurrection  of  the  European 
nations.  The  history  of  this  nation  is  an  important  chapter 
of  universal  history,  and  as  such  alone  it  deserves  careful 
examination  by  the  critical  inquirer  no  less  than  by  the  general 
reader. 

The  mode  of  existence  of  this  nation  is  yet  more  wonderful 
than  its  duration.  Thirty-three  centuries  ago  this  people, 
descending  from  a  pastoral  family,  and  doomed  to  oppression  and 
slavery  in  Egypt,  first,  of  all  nations  on  earth,  demanded  and 
obtained  liberty  and  independence.  Traversing  the  pathless 
desert,  Moses,  the  grandest  character  of  antiquity,  not  only 
taught  the  purest  doctrines  of  religion  and  morals  in  the  midst 
of  an  age  of  idolatry,  superstition,  and  general  corruption  of 
morals ;  but  he  also  promulgated  the  unsophisticated  principles 
of  democratic  liberty  and  of  stern  justice  in  an  age  of  general 
despotism  and  arbitrary  rule ;  thus  becoming  the  progenitor  of 
entirely  new  theories  which  revolutionized  the  ancient  world, 
and  lay  at  the  foundation  of  modern  civilization.  Moses  formed 
one  pole  and  the  American  revolution  the  other,  of  an  axis 
around  which  revolved  the  political  history  of  thirty- three  centu- 
ries. Trained  in  these  principles,  the  Israelites  took  possession 
of  their  land,  where  they  were  obliged  to  contend  with  as  many 
enemies  as  there  were  nations  around  them.  Still,  after  four 
centuries,  we  see  them  triumph  over  all   their  enemies,  and 


PREFACE. 


David  and  Solomon  the  lords  of  the  land  from  the  Euphrates 
to  the  Red  Sea  and  to  the  Mediterranean.  Industry,  commerce, 
art  and  science,  nourished,  and  the  nation  was  opulent, 
enlightened  and  free.  Divided  into  two  hostile  kingdoms  they 
successfully  opposed  for  one  century  the  united  armies  of 
Syria,  and  again  they  rose  to  their  former  splendor;  the 
Solomonian  empire  was  restored  under  Jerobeam  II  and 
Uziah.  The  Assyrian  giant  swallowed  all  Syria,  and  even 
succeeded  in  razing  the  walls  of  Samaria;  but  after  a  des- 
perate struggle  of  nearly  thirty  years,  he  lay  slain  on  the 
mountains  and  plains  of  Judah,  and  once  more  this  nation 
enjoyed  the  privileges  of  a  liberal  government,  an  extended 
commerce,  and  became  an  enlightened  community.  The  unfor- 
tunate contest  between  Egypt  and  Babylonia  brought  the 
Israelites  between  two  collossal  empires,  to  neither  of  which 
it  could  offer  an  effectual  resistance ;  and  after'resorting  to  the 
most  desperate  means  to  maintain  its  independence,  it  fell 
heroically,  crushed  under  the  immense  weight  of  Babylonia, 
and  after  a  national  existence  of  nearly  nine  centuries. 
Babylonia  fell,  Persia  rose,  and  after  fifty  years  of  non-exist- 
ence, Israel  emerged  again  from|the  nations,  and  returned  to 
the  beloved  mountains  of  its  dear  home.  The  trumpet  of  the 
angel  of  resurrection  resounded  in  Judah,  cities  and  temple 
rose  from  their  ruins  as  the  Phoenix  from  the  ashes,  under  the 
protection  of  Persia,  on  which  it  nominally  depended;  new 
elements  for  future  greatness  were  prepared,  and  it  waited 
patiently  for  an  opportunity  to  gain  its  independence.  But 
there  came  Alexander,  who  brought  to  an  end  the  degenerated 
Persian  empire,  and  Palestine  became  the  apple  of  contention 
between  Egypt  and  Syria.     Being  frequently  the  theatre  of  war 


VI  PREFACE. 

between  those  two  powers,  and  constantly  changing  masters, 
the  land  became  impoverished.  This  state  of  things  produced  in 
the  nation  two  violent  parties,  the  national  and  the  helenistic, 
disuniting  and  enfeebling  the  people ;  so  that  no  rational  hope 
could  be  entertained,  that  this  nation  would  ever  gain  its 
independence.  But  when  the  oppression  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  had  become  insufferable,  when  that  king  attempted 
to  Grecianize  the  Israelites,  which  would  have  blotted  them 
out  from  the  list  of  nations,  the  lion  of  Judah  started  from 
his  slumber  and  Syria  trembled  as  he  awoke.  The  grey- 
headed Matathia,  the  progenitor  of  the  Hasmonean  dynasty, 
unfurled  the  standard  of  insurrection.  The  nation  revived, 
the  patriots  flocked  to  the  glorious  banner  of  liberty  and  inde- 
pendence, the  disciplined  armies  of  Syria  fell  under  the  blows  of 
the  inspired  champions,  and  the  Israelitish  nation  was  born 
again.  Matathia  died,  his  brave  sons  continued  the  struggle 
successfully;  Israel  was  independent,  and  once  mt>re  it  rose  to 
the  zenith  of  national  glory.  Rome  had  become  the  queen  of 
Europe,  of  northern  Africa  and  western  Asia.  The  nations 
bowed  down  respectfully  to  the  Roman  eagle.  The  languages, 
laws,  religions  and  customs  of  the  nations  rapidly  disappeared 
giving  way  to  those  of  Rome.  Israel  fought  nearly  two  centu- 
ries against  her  gigantic  power.  It  was  plundered  of  its 
wealth,  deprived  of  its  independence,  its  cities  were  deso- 
lated and  ruined,  the  country  devastated,  its  sons  and 
daughters  sold  into  perpetual  slavery,  its  champions  were 
slain,  terror  and  consternation  were  spread  over  the  land; 
still  it  fought.  Jerusalem  and  the  temple  were  destroj-ed,  bury- 
ing under  their  ruins  thousands  of  the  noblest  champions ;  the 
land  was  depopulated  and  poor;   oppression,  dismay  and  famine 


PREFACE.  Vii 

were  arrayed  against  that  people ;  still  it  fought.  Only  after 
Roman  legions  were  brought  from  as  far  as  Britannia,  after 
cruelty,  treachery  and  the  most  abominable  inhumanity  were 
leagued  against  Israel,  and  after  it  was  betrayed  by  its  friends 
and  saw  its  champions  slain  everywhere,  it  fell;  it  was  crushed 
but  not  annihilated.  Since  then,  Israel  is  scattered  among  all 
nations  on  the  earth.  It  went  through  all  phases  of  civiliza- 
tion, taking  an  active  part  in  the  development  of  mankind, 
through  all  scenes  of  happiness  and  adversity,  and  through  all 
the  revolutions  of  ages.  It  flourished  when  befriended  by 
others,  but  it  was  not  crushed  by  the  numerous  and  violent 
persecutions  to  which  it  was  exposed.  Neither  misery  and 
death,  nor  promises  and  arguments  were  successfully  employed 
in  blending  them  with  the  generality  in  religious  views,  or  in 
depriving  them  of  that  native  buoyancy  which  held  them  erect 
in  the  storms  of  ages,  and  went  with  them  from  land  to  land. 
They  have  maintained  their  language,  literature,  religion, 
traditions  and  customs,  and  in  a  great  measure  also  their 
national  peculiarities  and  moral  character  during  eighteen 
centuries  of  dispersion  and  successive  miseries,  but  seldom 
interrupted  by  the  sunshine  of  happiness.  Is  it  not  a  noble 
and  instructive  lesson  to  explore  and  to  comprehend  the  causes 
of  this  unparalleled  union,  this  infinite  perseverance,  this 
unshaken  confidence  and  self-denial,  indicated  in  the  struggles 
against  overwhelming  forces,  and  this  heroic  defiance  against 
the  omnipotence  of  fate?  This  important  problem,  however 
frequently  proposed,  was  never  solved;  nor  can  it  ever  be 
solved  without  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  history  of  the 
Israelitish  Nation. 

Here  the  theologian  will  remark,  that  this  nation  was  spared 


Vlll  PREFACE 

by  the  special  grace  of  Providence,  to  promulgate  the  truth, 
revealed  on  Mount  Sinai,  and  the  Christian  theologian  will  add, 
and  to  testify  to  the  truth  of  the  Gospel.  But  without  enter- 
ing into  those  differences  it  must  be  remarked,  that  Providence 
makes  use  of  certain  intellectual  means  to  produce  effects; 
and  the  means  by  which  those  extraordinary  effects  were  pro- 
duced must  be  very  interesting  indeed;  worthy  of  being 
correctly  known  and  studied.  But  those  means  can  not  be 
guessed  at  by  the  pleasing  poet  or  ingenious  preacher,  nor  can 
they  be  produced  by  the  most  profound  metaphysical  specula- 
tions. They  are  stored  up  in  the  arsenal  of  history;  there  is 
the  right  place  to  seek  for  them ;  there  they  must  be  found. 

Besides  this  political  history,  the  Israelitish  nation  can  show 
to  the  world  a  history  of  literature  which  begins  with  Moses 
(1485  b.  a),  and  passing  through  all  the  centuries  and  phases 
of  learning  and  civilization  it  reaches  up  to  our  days,  repre- 
senting all  phases  of  humanity  and  all  directions  of  the  mind 
during  thirty-three  centuries.  Its  inspired  bards  touched  the 
secret  chords  of  the  heart  before  Orpheus  and  Homer  tuned 
the  Grecian  lyre.  Its  prophetic  orators  charmed  the  minds  of 
millions  with  their  fresh  current  of  bold  elocution  before  De- 
mosthenes and  Cicero  spoke  to  the  multitudes  of  Athens  and 
Rome.  Its  law-giver  stands  unrivalled  in  history,  and  its 
philosophers  are  the  first  on  record. 

The  national  literati  of  Israel  were  not  diminished  by  the 
conclusion  of  the  Biblical  canon,  nor  did  this  alter  the  ingenuity 
and  productiveness  of  the  mind.  Hebrew  poets  sung  in  the 
language  of  Isaiah  in  every  century,  so  that  also  in  our  days 
Hebrew  poets  abound,  such  as  M.  Leteris,  Luzzatto,  Rapeport, 
Stern,  and^others,  and  the  last  century  produced  some  of  the 


PREFACE.  IX 

sweetest  singers  of  Israel.  Besides  those  poets  who  wrote  in 
the  Hebrew  tongue,  this  nation  has  produced  numerous  bards 
who  wrote  in  the  different  languages  of  the  nations  among 
whom  they  lived,  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  A  collection  of 
the  poetical  productions  in  Hebrew  and  other  languages  com- 
posed by  Israelites  would  be  much  larger  than  the  poetical 
productions  of  any  other  nation.  The  same  assertion  would 
be  correct  in  regard  to  musical  compositions.  The  Israelitish 
literati  have  been  no  less  active  upon  the  field  of  philosophy 
and  theology  during  all  the  time  after  Philo  and  Josephus. 
Although  but  few  of  those  men  are  known  to  the  world  at 
large,  such  as  Philo,  Saadias,  Jehudah  Halewi,  Abn  Ezra, 
Maimonides,  Nachmoides,  Don  Abarbanel,  De  Rossi,  Menassah 
ben  Israel,  Del  Medigo,  Spinoza,  Mendelssohn,  Maimon,  and 
others,  still  these  few  names  are  sufficient  to  convince  the 
reader,  that  Israel  had  prominent  philosophers  in  every  age. 
It  would  be  superfluous  to  remark  here,  that  the  Israelites  had 
numerous  authors  in  all  branches  of  oriental  philology,  biblio- 
graphy, lexicography,  and  exegesis,  as  this  was  the  field  almost 
peculiar  to  that  nation  up  to  the  eighteenth  century.  The 
reformation  of  Doctor  Martin  Luther  and  others  would  not 
have  occurred  if  the  Israelites  had  not  previously  investigated 
all  branches  of  biblical  criticism,  and  directed  the  mind 
of  the  learned  to  a  conception  of  revealed  religion  altogether 
different  from  the  one  adopted  and  advocated  in  Rome. 

The  principal  bulk  of  the  literature  of  this  nation  belongs 
to  the  branch  of  jurisprudence.  Religion,  law,  justice,  and 
righteousness,  were  synonyms,  and  so  blended  that  it  became 
one  sacred  element,  which  claimed  the  attention  of  the  learned 
Israelites  from   time   immemorial  to  our  own  days.     Three- 


X  PREFACE. 

fourths  of  the  vast  and  unexplored  field  of  rabbinical  literature 
is  occupied  by  jurisprudence,  and  there  are  indeed  but  few- 
questions  in  that  science,  the  international  law  excepted, 
which  were  not  discussed  by  some  of  the  rabbins  with  that 
hair-splitting  sagacity  which  is  characteristic  of  Israelitish 
sages.  The  laws  of  Moses  preceded  those  of  Lycurgus,  Draco, 
and  Solon.  The  expounders  of  that  law  had  produced  a  code 
of  laws,  the  Mishna,  previous  to  Theodosius  and  Justinius,  and 
long  before  the  common  law  was  known.  The  Israelites 
studied  law  before  the  migration  of  nations  and  during  the 
middle  ages,  and  they  have  never  yet  abandoned  that  study. 
Interesting  to  the  student  is  the  strange  similarity  between  the 
common  and  the  rabbinical  law,  which  correspond  almost  pre- 
cisely in  principles  and  practice. 

The  attention  of  the  learned  was  called  to  that  vast  litera- 
ture in  the  seventeenth  century  by  the  two  Buxtorfs,  father 
and  son,  Plantavitius  and  GafFarelli;  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury by  Hyde,  Le  Long,  Montfaucon,  Hackspan,  Shickard, 
Hody,  Richard  Simon,  Bartolocci,  Wolf,  Lightfoot,  Reland, 
and  a  host  of  others ;  in  the  nineteenth  century  this  field  has 
been  occupied  almost  exclusively  by  Israelites,  such  as  Buchner, 
Luzzatto,  Reggio,  Rapaport,  Zunz,  Frankel,  Geiger,  Fuerst- 
enthal,  Fuerst,  Krochmal,  Dukes,  Cassel,  Carmoli,  Kirchheim, 
Landshut,  Lebrecht,  Steinschneider,  and  others. 

Finally,  if  we  direct  our  attention  to  the  history  of  com- 
merce, we  meet  again  with  the  Israelite  playing  there  also  a 
prominent  part.  The  ancient  Israelites ,  during  and  after  the  days 
of  Solomon,  actively  were  engaged  in  transmarine  trade,  sending 
their  ships  to  Tarshish  and  Ophir.  They  were  important  in 
this  respect  in  Alexandria,  in  Babel,  in  Rome,  and  afterwards 


PREFACE.  XI 

in  the  Italian  cities,  no  less  than  in  the  Netherlands.  They 
were  the  bankers  and  merchants  of  the  known  world  during  the 
middle  ages,  connecting  by  their  industry  the  cities  of  the  east- 
ern continent.  They  were  forced  away  from  every  kind  of  occu- 
pation, they  were  prohibited  from  owning  real  estate,  and  from 
residing  in  certain  cities,  and  restricted  to  certain  streets  of 
other  cities ;  they  were  forced  to  pay  heavy  taxes ;  were  frequent- 
ly robbed  of  all  their  money  and  property.  Still  they  flourished, 
were  rich  and  industrious,  wherever  they  were.  The  most  re- 
markable fact  is,  that  even  in  these  United  States  the  Israelitish 
emigrants  succeed  better  in  commercial  enterprises  than  do  any  of 
the  different  races  and  nationalities  flocking  to  these  hospitable 
shores.  We  have  set  down  some  of  the  elements,  which  make 
the  history  of  this  nation  important  to  every  reader,  and 
therefore  we  hope  to  add  a  useful  and  welcome  contribution 
to  American  literature. 

The  history  of  this  nation  has  hitherto  been  treated  merely 
as  a  part  of  ecclesiastical  history,  which  was  the  reason  why 
every  author  represented  it  according  to  his  own  views  on  the 
subject  of  religion.  Basnage,  Bastholms,  Jahn,  Jost,  Lengerke, 
Ehwald,  Herzfeld,  Salvador  and  Friedlander  must  be  excepted 
from  this  accusation;  but  their  works  are  written  in  French, 
Danish  or  German.  Milman,  Cockayne  and  Hannah  Adams,  if 
they  had  written  a  history  instead  of  a  synopsis,  would  also  have 
made  an  honorable  exception.  It  may  justly  be  said,  that  the  po- 
litical history,  the  history  of  the  literature,  the  commerce,  the 
jurisprudence  of  the  Israelites,  does  not  yet  exist  in  the  English 
language.  Still  it  is  certain  that  the  history  of  a  nation  is 
only  then  distinct  and  accessible  to  the  reader,  when  all  the 
vital  elements  of  that  nation  are  duly  and  connectively  con- 


Xii  PREFACE. 

sidered.  Such  a  complete  history  we  lay  before  our  readers. 
We  have  ample  access  to  the  whole  literature,  ancient  and 
modern,  belonging  to  this  history;  and  having  discarded  all 
prejudices,  national  and  religious,  we  are  enabled  to  lay  before 
our  readers  a  complete  and  pragmatical  history  of  the  Israel- 
itish  nation,  derived  from  the  original  sources,  written  in  a 
spirit  of  philosophical  criticism,  independence  and  impartiality, 
for  Jews  and  Gentiles,  and  treated  in  the  same  method  as  if  it 
were  the  history  of  any  other  nation.  We  entertain  the  hope 
that  this  history  will  direct  the  attention  of  the  learned  to 
the  vast  literature  of  the  Israelites,  and  level  a  new  road  of 
criticism  upon  this  large  field,  so  that  our  humble  production 
may  soon  be  superseded  by  that  of  an  abler  pen. 
Albany,  N.  Y„  December  1,  1853. 


INTRODUCTION  TO  VOLUME  I. 


The  first  volume  of  this  work  comprises  the  history  of  the 
Israelitish  nation  from  the  patriarch  Abraham  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  temple  of  Solomon.  The  sources  of  this  period  are 
the  Pentateuch,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings,  Chronicles, 
Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ruth,  the  Song  of  Solomon,  Isaiah,  Jere- 
miah, Lamentations,  Ezekiel,  Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Abadiah, 
Jonah,  Micah,  Nahum,  Habakuk,  and  Zephaniah.  These  books 
are  before  us  in  the  original  tongue,  together  with  all  the 
known  ancient  versions  and  commentaries. 

Historical  investigations,  concerning  the  time  when,  and  the 
authors  by  whom  these  books  were  written,  will  be  found  in 
their  proper  places  in  this  volume. 

Besides  these  original  sources,  we  have  consulted  Josephus, 
Philo,  and  the  ancient  rabbins,  because  they  were  so  much 
nearer  in  time  to  this  period  of  history,  were  better  acquainted 
with  the  manners,  customs,  and  circumstances  of  that  age, 
and,  probably,  were  in  possession  of  more  extensive  sources 
than  we.  We  have  not  neglected  to  bestow  attention  on  the 
biblical  criticism  of  the  modern  schools,  both  orthodox  and 
rational;  but  we  were  led  exclusively  by  none,  having  always 
exercised  our  own  judgment  where  the  authorities  differ.  "We 
have  had  recourse  to  the  best  authors  on  the  history  of  those 
nations    who   came  in  contact   with   the    Israelites.     So   we 


XIV  INTRODUCTION    TO 

consulted  on  Egypt,  Wilkinson,  Bunson.  Sharpe,  Champollion, 
Kenrick,  and  the  classics ;  on  Syria,  Assyria  and  Babylonia, 
we  consulted  Botta,  Layard,  Sharpe,  Banomi,  and  the  classics. 
In  the  geography  of  Palestine  and  the  adjacent  countries,  we 
were  led  by  Reland,  Benjamin  of  Tuleda,  Schwarz,  Robinson 
&  Smith,  Niebuhr,  Ritter,  Du  Bois-Ayme,  and  D'Anville.  In 
archeology,  we  consulted  Godwin,  Jennings,  and  De  Wette, 
without  placing  implicit  confidence  in  either  of  them.  Rape- 
port's  Erech  Milin,  Lawson's  Bible  Cyclopedia,  and  the  critical 
investigations  laid  down  in  the  Measseph,  Bikureilttim,  Cherem 
Hemed,  Orient,  andFrankel's  Monatsschrift,  were  not  neglected 
by  the  author. 

In  history  we  found  no  book  with  which  we  were  fully 
satisfied.  The  rationalists  utterly  misconceived  the  spirit  of 
that  age,  and  being  frequently  misled  by  philological  niceties, 
erecting  large  structures  upon  the  tottering  basis  of  a  few 
words,  they  are  deprived  of  numerous  facts  which  belong  to 
the  whole  history,  and  are  thus  disabled  from  giving  proper 
connection  to  detached  events.  On  the  other  side,  the  orthodox 
have  done  no  more  than  to  extract  historical  events  from  the 
Bible  which  they  joined  together^without  critical  judgment  and 
without  accounting  for  their  method.  They  offer  to  the 
student  nothing  more  nor  less  than  what  every  simple  reader 
of  the  Bible  finds  there.  A  history  of  this  nature  recently 
made  its  appearance  bearing  the  name  of  Archibald  Alexander, 
D.  D.,  late  professor  in  the  Theological  Seminary  at  Princeton, 
N.  J.  All  neglected  to  bestow  proper  attention  on  the  litera- 
ture and  traditions  of  the  nation  whose  history  they  wrote ; 
the  former  from  a  spirit  of  hypercriticism,  and  the  latter  from 
religious    prejudices,   and  partly  also  from  ignorance  of  the 


VOLUME    I.  XV 

rabbinical  literatnre.  We  were,  therefore,  obliged  to  write  an 
entirely  new  history,  hewn,  as  it  were,  from  the  original  rock. 

In  order  to  avoid  misunderstandings,  we  deem  it  necessary 
to  lay  down  the  principles  which  chiefly  guided  us  in  this  task. 
It  must  be  remarked  in  the  first  place,  that  none  should  be 
misled  and  judge  this  work  by  a  translation  of  the  Bible,  for 
the  best  translation  compares  with  the  original  as  the  image 
with  the  person  which  it  represents,  and  it  must  be  remembered 
that  all  the  translators,  biased  as  they  were,  took  much  pains 
to  mystify  the  Bible,  and  that  each  of  them  labored  under  the 
disadvantage  of  being  obliged  to  suit  scriptures  to  the  views 
and  conceptions  of  a  particular  sect. 

The  difficulty  which  we  encountered  on  the  threshold  in  the 
writing  of  this  volume  is  this.  The  facts  preserved  in  scrip- 
tures are  surrounded  by  doctrines  and  miracles,  so  that  it  often 
becomes  difficult  to  say  which  belongs  to  the  province  of  history. 
The  facts  are  sometimes  but  touched  upon  by  the  inspired 
speakers,  and  often  narrated  in  two  or  three  different  ways, 
so  that  it  is  difficult  to  choose.  We  have  proceeded  on  the 
following  principle.  History  is  distinguished  from  religion 
and  theology  as  the  ideas  of  knowing  and  believing.  History 
records  what  is  established  by  the  criteria  of  criticism  to  be 
fact,  while  the  dogmas  and  doctrines  of  religion  are  based  upon 
faith,  not  admitting  of  the  rigid  application  of  criticism. 
Rational  theology  itself  can  not  proceed  beyond  a  reconciliation 
of  faith  and  reason.  This,  however,  is  insufficient  in  history, 
where  evidences  are  required  that  things  actually  took  place, 
where,  when  and  how  they  occurred. 

The  next  distinction  between  history  and  religion  is  this :  the 
former  treats  on   man,    and   the  latter  on   God.     If  this  be 


Xvi  INTRODUCTION    TO 

admitted,  it  must  necessarily  follow  that  miracles  do  not 
belong  to  the  province  of  history.  Miracles  can  be  wrought 
by  God  only,  and  history  records  what  men  have  done.  The 
historian  may  believe  the  miracles,  but  he  has  no  right  to 
incorporate  them  in  history.  As  a  general  thing  man  is  always 
the  agent  or  the  subject  of  miracles,  consequently  the  action 
itself  may  be  historical,  and  can  be  adopted  in  history  if  it 
can  be  ascribed  to  common  and  natural  causes,  while  the 
miracle  as  such  belongs  to  the  province  of  theology. 

Doctrines  are  not,  of  themselves,  a  part  of  history;  they  are 
of  importance  only  so  far  as  they  exercised  an  influence  upon 
human  actions  which  became  part  of  history.  If  this  be 
admitted,  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  historian  dare  not 
confound  doctrines  and  facts.  The  origin  of  doctrines,  if 
marvelous,  must  be  considered  the  same  with  other  miracles. 

According  to  these  principles,  we  have  adopted  only  such 
facts  as  are  able  to  stand  the  test  of  criticism;  miracles  for 
which  we  could  not  find  common  and  natural  reasons,  were 
not  recorded  by  us,  still  we  have  attempted  to  find  such  reasons 
wherever  we  could.  We  did  not  contradict  or  deny  the  rest, 
neither  did  we  deem  ourselves  entitled  to  consider  them  as 
a  part  of  history.  The  main  body  of  the  book  contains  the 
political  history,  and  the  appendix  of  every  period  contains  the 
doctrines,  principles,  customs,  and  the  literary  activity  of  that 
particular  age.  We  have  drawn  proper  lines  of  demarkation 
between  history,  theology  and  exegesis,  although  we  could  not 
avoid  critical  investigations  in  the  main  body  of  the  book,  in 
order  to  establish  certain  facts,  or  to  make  others  intelligible. 

The  next  difficulty  which  we  encountered  is  this.  The 
authors  of  the  books  from  which  this  part  of  history  is  drawn, 


VOLUME    I.  X\U 

claim  for  most  of  the  prominent  actors  a  direct  and  mystical 
communication  with  the  Deity.  If  this  be  admitted  as  apart 
of  history,  the  limits  drawn  before  arc  overstepped.  If  it  be 
denied,  the  sources  are  so  impaired,  that  it  is  difficult  to 
determine  what  is  true.  This  embarrassment  is  somewhat 
increased  by  the  consideration,  that  almost  all  lawgivers, 
philosophers,  poets,  and  heroes  of  antiquity,  nay,  even  the 
inventors  of  useful  arts,  and  the  cultivators  of  sciences,  claimed 
for  themselves  divine  communications.  The  historian  in  order 
to  be  impartial,  as  he  ought  to  be,  must  either  admit  that  Menes 
and  Moses.  Orpheus  and  Isaiah,  Socrates  and  Jeremiah,  Plato 
and  Paul,  received  communications  from  God,  in  which  he  tran- 
scends the  sober  limits  of  history,  and  overthrows  all  systems 
of  theology,  or  he  must  deny  that  divine  communication  to  all  of 
them.  In  this  latter  case,  he  degrades  the  ancient  history  to  a 
compendium  of  fables,  and  debases  the  noblest  and  staunchest 
defenders  of  humanity,  those  who  are  the  pride  of  human 
nature,  to  willful  impostors.  We  have  to  offer  the  following 
remarks  on  the  subject,  which  will  inform  the  reader  of  the 
point  of  view  from  which  we  judged  the  subject  in  the  present 
work. 

An  attentive  examination  of  history  convinces  every  one, 
that  mankind  must  pass  through  the  same  periods  of  life  and 
development  as  every  individual;  because  the  race  is  regulated 
by  the  same  moral  and  physical  laws  as  the  individual.  Man- 
kind had  its  period  of  childhood,  its  flowery  age  of  youth,  its 
strong  days  of  manhood,  and  it  will  wax  old.  Calm  reasoning 
and  quiet  reflection  are  the  mental  operations  of  matured  man 
only;  the  noble  youth  thinks,  speaks  and  acts  by  a  spontaneous 
impulse  for  which  our  philosophers  have  no  name.  A  careful 
A 


XVlll  INTRODUCTION    TO 

investigation  into  the  distinctions  of  cause  and  effect,  proba- 
bility and  necessity,  real  or  imaginary  beings,  must  not  be 
expected  of  the  ardent  youth,  whose  glowing  imagination 
conjures  up  a  paradise  inhabited  by  angels,  imbues  the  granite 
with  life  and  sensibility,  and  realizes  by  a  magic  power  all  the 
desires  of  the  heart.  Mankind  had  also  its  happy  days  of 
youth.  The  few  representatives  cf  that  age  which  now  and 
then  appear  among  us  (poets,  painters,  sculptors  and  musicians), 
prove,  that  the  youth  of  mankind  was  a  happy  period.  The 
paradisaic  regions  of  Milton  were  beheld  with  rapture  by  many 
a  happy  man  in  days  of  yore.  The  noble  forms  which  Raphael, 
Correggio,  or  Van  Dyke,  conceived  in  the  moment  of  inspira- 
tion, appeared  as  guardian  angels  to  many  a  happy  man  of 
antiquity.  The  amiable  and  truly  great  beings  through  which 
our  dramatic  poets  pour  forth  fresh  streams  of  ideas  and 
verities,  and  which  moved  solemnly  and  divinely  through  the 
fancy  and  the  heart  of  their  creators,  appeared  as  tutelar  gods 
to  the  men  of  bygone  ages.  We,  though  delighted  by  those 
fictitious  creations,  distinguish  between  realities  and  imaginary 
beings;  the  men  living  in  the  juvenile  age  of  mankind  made  no 
such  distinctions. 

In  connection  with  this,  must  be  considered  the  conceptions 
which  the  ancients  formed  of  the  operations  of  God,  or  the 
gods,  in  the  universe.  Their  reasoning  faculties  were  still 
considerably  impaired  by  the  active  operations  of  fancy,  which 
disabled  them  from  penetrating  the  veil  with  which  nature 
covered  its  secret  laboratory;  they  saw  in  every  phenomenon 
of  nature,  both  moral  and  physical,  a  direct  manifestation  of 
the  Deity.  Ever}-  operation  in  nature  was  ascribed  directly 
to  Elohim  or  Satan,  Ormuzd  or  Ahriman,  Kneph  or  Typhon, 


VOLUME    I.  XIX 

Zeus  or  Pluto.  God  thundered,  rained  and  turned  the  fiery 
chariot  of  the  sun;  he  caused  the  wind  to  blow,  the  storm  to 
roar,  and  the  earth  to  quake;  he  rolled  the  streams  of  water 
into  the  sea,  and  they  were  dried  up  at  his  command.  "  I  am 
all" — the  inscription  at  Sais  read — "that  has  been,  that  is, 
and  that  will  be,  and  no  man  has  lifted  my  veil."  Every  being, 
animate  or  inanimate,  was  regarded  as  a  mere  instrument 
through  which  God  operated  immediately.  The  roar  of  tho 
thunder,  and  the  ideas  arising  in  the  mind;  the  dew  falling 
upon  the  summits  of  Hermon,  and  the  speech  proceeding  from 
the  lips  of  man,  were  considered  equally  divine,  directly  pro- 
ceeding from  the  one  or  the  other  god.  What  evidences  a 
priori  can  be  produced  to  the  contrary  ?  "With  what  right  can 
the  theologians  of  the  present  day  deny  this  view  of  the  uni- 
verse ?  This  exposition  fully  accounts  for  the  frequent  appear- 
ance of  angels  among  the  Hebrews  and  of  tutelar  deities  among 
the  heathen,  for  the  faith  put  in  dreams,  omens  and  oracles, 
and  for  the  fear  and  superstition  which  the  appearance  of 
unusual  phenomena  produced.  If,  therefore,  Menes,  Orpheus, 
Solon,  Socrates,  Plato,  or  any  other] sage  of  antiquity,  pre- 
tended to  receive  communications  from  some  deity,  it  was  no 
imposition;  it  was  their  ardent  desire  to  elevate  mankind,  their 
lofty  and  youthful  imagination,  and  their  corresponding  reli- 
gious conceptions,  which  appeared  to  them  in  the  form  of  con- 
crete beings,  and  spoke  to  them  in  a  language  understood  by 
them  alone,  and  they  alone  could  reproduce,  in  human  language, 
the  language  of  poesy. 

In  connection  with  these  general  conceptions  of  the  ancients 
must  be  considered  the  peculiar  conceptions  of  the  Hebrews. 
The  pure  and  sublime  ideas  of  the  Deity  peculiar  to  the  ancient 


XX  INTRODUCTION    TO 

Israelites,  conferred  upon  them  a  just  claim  to  the  title  of  The 
People  of  Jehovah,  or  the  Chosen  People.  This  produced 
in  that  nation  the  consciousness  of  a  distinguishing  and 
friendly  relation  between  God  and  Israel,*  who  was  believed 
to  watch  with  an  especial  eye  over  Israel  (n-D1|J  niwn).  God 
was  the  king  and  the  father,  and  Israel  was  his  people  and  his 
son.  It  can  easily  be  imagined  what  sentiments  this  leading 
idea  produced.  The  unshaken  and  unexceptionable  confidence 
in  God  characterizing  this  people;  the  boldness  and  divine 
inspiration  of  their  prophets,  orators,  sages  and  martyrs,  who 
advocated  and  expounded  this  leading  idea,  and  frequently 
confirmed  it  by  their  own  lives;  the  indestructability  of  their 
nationality  and  the  unyielding  fortitude  with  which  they  ad- 
hered to  their  religion,  are  the  next  consequences  of  that  sub- 
lime consciousness. 

It  was  not  only  the  individual  thus  relying  upon  Providence, 
but  the  nation  as  a  union,  a  totality,  which  was  thus  imme- 
diately connected  with  the  Deity;  and,  therefore,  the  laws 
regulating  this  commonwealth  were  divine,  the  king  was  the 
messiah  of  the  Lord,  the  high  priest  was  the  oracle  of  the  Lord, 
the  prophets  were  His  especial  messengers,  the  judges  were  an 
Elohim  who  dispensed  justice  in  the  name  of  the  Lord,  and 
the  national  council,  the  collective  wisdom  and  will  of  the 
people,  were  the  especial  instrument,  through  which  his  will 
and  his  decrees  were  revealed.  This  was  the  voice  of  God 
speaking  through  the  prophets,  high  priests,  magistrates,  kings, 
judges  and  the  national  council,  as  circumstances  required  it. 
This  was  afterwards  called  b'b  ro  "  The  reecho  of  the  voice 

*  Exodus  xix,  4-6  5   Deuteronomy  xxvi,  10-19. 


VOLUME    I.  XXI 

of  God,"  and  the  Romans  said,  Vox  populi,  vox  Dei.  If  the 
reader  has  properly  considered  what  has  been  said  in  this  intro- 
duction, he  is  acquainted  with  the  principles  which  directed  us 
in  the  composition  of  the  present  volume,  and  he  is  requested 
to  admit,  that  they  enabled  us  to  write  a  political  history  of  the 
Israelii ish  nation. 


CONTENTS. 


*  •  •  » 


PA  OR 


Preface, iii 

Introduction  to  Volume  I., xiii 

PERIOD  I. 

From  the  birth  of  Abraham  to  the  demise  of  Moses. 

Biblical  Chronology, 1 

CHAPTER  I. 

The  Patriarchs, 1 

The  title  of  the  Israelites  to  the  land  of  Canaan, 37 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Israelites  in  Egypt.     The  Exode, 41 

CHAPTER  III. 

Israel  in  the  wilderness, 72 

Appendix  to  Period  I. 

I.  The  Country. 

a.  Geographical  Sketch. 109 

b.  Title, 110 

c.  Design, 115 

d.  Division  and  Inheritance  of  the  Land, 116 

e.  Occupation, 1 20 

f.  Products, 121 

II.  The  Government. 

a.  The  People, 121 

b.  The  Union  of  the  Nation, 124 

c.  The  Executive   Power, 125 

d.  The  National  Council, 127 

e.  The  Prophets  and  Priests,  ]  23 

f.  The  Judiciary, 129 

g.  The  Military, 131 

h.  Exceptions, 132 


CONTENTS.  Xxiil 

PAGX 

III.  The  Theory  of  the  Law, 133 

IV.  Health, 138 

V.  The  Family, 142 

VI.  Servants, 148 

VII.  The  Poor,  Widows,  Orphans  and  Strangers, 150 

VIII.  Commerce,   152 

IX.  Security  of  Person, 154 

X.  Security  of  Property, 155 

XI.  Security  of  Honor, 155 

XII.  The  Penal  Law, 150 

XIII.  Religion, 

Preliminary  Remarks, 161 

a.  The  Spirit  of  Religion, 162 

b.  The  Forms  of  Religion, 169 

1 .  The  Tabernacle  and  its  Servants, 170 

2.  The  Sacrifices, 175 

3.  The  Feasts, 177 

4.  The  Nazir, 1 80 

5.  The  Law  concerning  the  Dead, 1S2 

XIV.  Taxes  and  the  Treasury, 185 

XV.  The  Prophecies  of  Moses, 187 

XVI.  Literature, 190 

XVII.  Mechanical  Arts, 195 

PERIOD  II. 

From  the  accession  of  Joshua  to  the  chief  command,  to  the  end  of  the 

republic  in  the  time  of  Samuel, 

Biblical  Chronology, 197 

CHAPTER  IV. 

Administration  of  Joshua, 198 

CHAPTER  V. 

From  Othniel  to  the  demise  of  Samson, 219 

CHAPTER  VI. 

From  the  demise  of  Samson  to  the  end  of  the  Republic, 243 

Appendix  to  Period  II. 

I .  The  People  and  the  Country, 259 

II.  The  Government  and  the  Laws, 265 

III.  Religion  and  Idolatry, 27G 

IV.  Literature, ....  1 , 286 


XXIV  CONTENTS. 

PERIOD  III. 

PA3  E 

From  the  Appointment  of  Saul  to  the  Royal  Dignity  to  the  division  of 

the  Kingdom, 
Biblical  Chronology, 2 J7 

CHAPTER  VII. 
From  the  Accession  of  Saul  to  the  throne  of  Israel,  to  the  death  of  his 

son  and  successor, 297 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
Administration  of  David, 330 

CHAPTER    IX. 
Administration  of  Solomon, 3G2 

Appendix  to   Period  III. 

I.  The  People  and  the  Country, 3S4 

II.  The  Government, 3SS 

III.  Religion, 305 

IV.  Ivlusie, 3!)S 

V.  Literature, 400 

PERIOD  IV. 

From  the  Division  of  the  Empire  into  the  Kingdoms  of  Judah  and  Israel 

to  the  fall  of  Samaria. 
Biblical  Chronology,   414 

CHAPTER  X. 
From  Jerobeam  and  Rehabeam  to  the  expiration  of  the  Omri  d3'nasty, . .      415 

CHAPTER  XI. 
From  the  expiration  of  the  Omri  dynasty  to  the  fall  of  Samaria, 407 

Appendix  to   Period  IV. 

I.  The  People  and  the  Country, 407 

II.  The  Government, 504 

III.  Religion, '.  507 

IV.  Literature, 512 

PERIOD  V. 

From  the  fall  of  Samaria  to  the  fall  of  Jerusalem. 

Biblical  Chronology, 522 

CHAPTER   XII. 
From  the  fall  of  Samaria  to  the  battle  of  Megiddc, 522 

CHAPTER  XIII. 
From  the  coronation  of  Jehoahaz  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 550 


f  fsnrosroa 


HISTORY 


ISRAELITISII  NATION. 


PERIOD  I. 

FROM  THE  BIRTH  OF  ABRAHAM  TO  THE  DEMISE  OF 
MOSES.     (1775— 2315,  A.M.     1985—1445,  B.C.) 

BIBLICAL    CHRONOLOGY. 

Age  of  Abraham  when  Isaac  was  horn, 100  years. 

Age  of  Isaac  when  Jacob  was  born. 60  years. 

Age  of  Jacob  when  coming  to  Egypt, 130  years. 

The  Israelites1  sojourn  in  Egypt,  according  to  Josephus 

and  the  ancient  rabbins, 210  years. 

The  Israelites'  sojourn  in  the  wilderness, 40  years. 

Total  number  of  years,         540 


CHAPTER  1. 

THE  PATRIARCHS.     19S5— 1695,  B.  C. 

Between  the  Euphrates,  the  Tigris  and  the  Khabur  rivers  is 
that  fertile  and  well-watered  plain,  which  the  ancient  Hebrews 
called  Aram  Neharaim,  Syria  of  the  rivers,  wherefore  the 
Greeks  denominated  it  Mesopotamia.  It  was  bounded  north 
by  the  modern  Armenia,  south  by  Babylonia,  east  by  Assyria, 
and  west  by  Syria  Proper.  In  that  country  was  "  Ur  of  the 
Chaldees,"  noted  as  being  the  birth-place  of  Abraham,  or 
Abram,  as  his  first  name  was.  Ur,  signifies  light,  which  name 
most  likely  was  given  to  the  place  by  the  ancient  fire-wor- 
shipers, considering  it  one  of  the  sacred  places;  wherefore 
it  was  inhabited  by  the  Chaldees.  the  priests  of  Zabiism,  and 
1 


2  PERIOD    I. 

the  caste  of  warriors  of  the  ancient  Babylonia.  The  name  of 
that  place  appears  to  be  of  nearly  the  same  antiquity  as  the 
emigration  of  Abram. 

The  father  of  Abram  was  Terah,  and  if  we  may  rely  on  the 
tradition,  his  mother  was  Amthela,  He  was  the  tenth  lineal 
descendant  of  Noah  by  Shem,  and  was  born  two  hundred  and 
ninety-two  years  after  the  deluge,  fifty-eight  years  before  the 
death  of  that  second  progenitor  of  mankind. 

The  youth  of  Abraham,  like  that  of  all  prominent  men  of 
antiquity,  is  surrounded  with  a  cloud  of  myths,*  so  that  it  is 
impossible  to  arrive  at  historical  truth  on  this  point.  The 
quintessence  of  those  myths  is  this :  The  progenitors  of  Abram, 
who  spoke  a  language  from  which  afterwards  the  Hebrew, 
Aramaic,  Chaldian,  Arabic,  and  the  kindred  tongues  sprung 
up,  led  a  pastoral  life  in  the  plains  of  Mesopotamia;  main- 
taining the  principles  of  primitive  religion,  as  they  are  found 
among  all  nations  of  antiquity,  and  especially  in  the  religious 
mysteries  of  the  Egyptians,  Persians,  Greeks,  and  Druids,  and 
in  the  sacred  books  of  the  Brahmins.  But  when  primitive 
religion  was  debased  into  idolatry,  the  father  of  Abram  also 
was  deluded  by  that  blasphemous  theology,  and  he  became  a 
carver  of  idols,  in  which  trade  also  Abram  was  instructed. 
The  first  tyrant,  Nimroud,  who  founded  an  empire  in  the  land 
of  Shinear,  was  also  the  first  who  made  religion  and  its 
ministers  serve  as  his  accomplices.  Nimroud  founded  temples 
to  the  different  idols,  conferred  high  dignities  upon  their 
priests,  and  suppressed  the  liberty  of  conscience,  so  that 
prejudice  and  fear  supported  the  fabric  of  state.  The  Chaldecs, 
formerly  mere  priests,  became  the  guardians  of  the  throne,  a 
caste  of  warriors.  Abram  was  early  convinced  of  the  folly 
and  wickedness  of  idolatry,  and  hesitated  not  to  give  free 
utterance  to  his  thoughts,  which  exposed  him  to  the  wrath 
of  Nimroud,  who  had  brought  a  large  part  of  Mesopotamia 
under  his  sway.     Terah,  unaccustomed  to  the  royal  yoke,  and 

*  Joseph.  Antiqu.  I,  vii,  1.  Pseudo-Jonathan  Genesis  xi,  28.  Bereshith 
Rabba  xxxviii.  Abulpharag.  Hist.  Dynast,  p.  20.  Coran  Sur  vi,  75.  Sur 
xxi,  52.     Hyde  de  Relig,  Vet.  Persar.  p.  62,  Bauer,  Gesch.  I,  p.  114. 


CHAPTEB    I.  6 

probably  also  convinced  of  the  truth  in  the  thoughts  of  his 
son,  emigrated  from  Ur  to  Haran,  or  Charaea,  the  ruins  of 
which  still  are  extant  a  few  miles  west  of  the  source  of  the 
Al  Habor.  This  city  was  distinguished  for  an  attachment  to 
Zabiism  from  the  earliest  ages;  and  in  the  worship  rendered 
to  the  hosts  of  heaven,  the  god,  Lunus,  denoting  the  moon  in  a 
masculine  form,  was  here  honored  with  a  particular  adoration. 
Here  Terah  found  rich  pasture  for  his  Hocks,  and  probably  was 
out  of  the  country  subjected  to  Nimroud,  wherefore  he  made 
there  his  new  home.  But  in  the  breast  of  Abram  there  was 
a  lire  much  warmer  than  the  sacred  fire  of  Ur;  in  his  mind  a 
light  had  risen,  which  emanated  more  brilliant  rays  than  the 
soft  beams  of  the  moon  reflected  from  the  pure  mirror  of  the 
Al  Habor.  It  was  the  idea  of  the  existence  of  One  God,  who 
created,  governs,  and  preserves  the  universe  by  his  mere  will, 
and  the  consciousness  that  it  is  man's  duty  to  worship  and 
to  obey  him ;  it  was  the  fervent  desire  to  maintain  the  pure 
principles  of  primitive  religion  unimpaired  and  unadulterated, 
as  Adam,  Hanoch,  Noah  and  Shem  had  taught  them,  which 
unceasingly  stimulated  Abram  to  leave  the  well-cultivated, 
fertile,  and  well- watered  banks  of  the  Al  Habor,  and  to  go 
forth  in  search  of  another  home,  where  he  might  constitute 
a  new  tribe,  separated  from  the  rest  of  mankind  and  their 
idolatry;  in  order  to  train  those,  who  are  his,  in  his  own  ideas 
and  principles.  No  wonder  then,  that  he,  whose  mind  was 
inspired  with  the  sublimest  ideas,  whose  heart  was  filled  with 
love  to  God  and  purity,  perceived  a  divine  call,  promising 
him  the  assistance  of  the  Almighty ;  that  his  tribe  will  grow 
up  to  become  a  great  nation ;  that  he  will  succeed  to  educate 
them  in  all  the  truth  and  purity  for  which  his  heart  longed ; 
that  his  fame  will  spread  over  all  the  families  of  the  earth, 
who  will  gladly  receive  from  his  hands  the  blessing  of  divine 
truth;  and  that  thereby  the  families  of  the  earth  will  be 
blessed  by  him  (Gen.  xii,  1-4). 

Abram  well  understood  that  divine  call,  for  it  was  the 
reecho  of  his  noble  heart;  and  no  sooner  had  his  father  died 
at  Haran,  than  he  left  his  brother  Nahar  in  possession  of  the 


4  PERIOD    I. 

paternal  inheritance,  took  his  wife  (and  half  sister)  Sarai.  Lot. 
the  son  of  his  brother  Haran,  who  had  died  in  Ur.  all  the 
persons  who  coincided  with  his  pious  views,  and  his  herds  and 
slaves,  and  started  across  the  Euphrates,  in  search  of  another 
land,  which  he  might  occupy  and  where  he  might  realize  his  pions 
plan  of  constituting  an  independent  tribe,  trained  in  his  prin- 
ciples and  doctrines. 

Nicolaus,  of  Damascus,  says  in  his  history,*  ';Abram  reigned 
at  Damascus,  being  a  foreigner,  who  came  with  an  army  out 
of  the  land  above  Babylon,  called  the  land  of  the  Chaldeans; 
but,  after  a  long  time,  he  got  him  up,  and  removed  from  that 
country  also,  with  his  people,  and  went  into  the  land  then 
called  the  land  of  Canaan,  but  now  the  land  of  Judea,  and 
this  when  his  posterity  were  become  a  multitude;  as  to  which 
posterity  of  his,  we  relate  their  history  in  another  work. 
Now  the  name  of  Abram  is  even  still  famous  in  the  country  of 
Damascus,  and  there  is  showed  a  village  named  from  him,  The 
Habitation  of  Abram.' " 

Abram  searched  for  unoccupied  land,  wherefore  he  continued 
his  journey,  until  he,  at  the  age  of  75  years,  had  come  to  the 
plain  of  Morah,  near  the  town  of  Shechem.  That  fertile  plain 
was  not  yet  occupied;  for  then,  the  sacred  records  remark,  the 
Canaanites  were  in  the  land,  who,  like  the  Phcenicians,  paid  more 
attention  to  trade  than  to  agriculture;  and  they  were  but  few  in 
number  as  we  shall  see  in  the  sequel.  Abram  took  formal  pos- 
session of  the  unoccupied  land,  by  building  an  altar  to  the  One 
God,  who  promised  him  the  land,  and  to  the  glory  of  whom  he 
dedicated  a  new  tribe. 

He  then  passed  through  the  land  in  a  southern  direction 
between  the  Jordan  and  the  mountains  of  Ephraim,  and 
pitching  his  tents  somewhere  between  Beth  El  and  Ai,  he 
again  built  an  altar  as  a  mark  of  having  taken  possession 
of  the  land  in  the  name  of  God,  Here  he  found  himself  sud- 
denly interrupted  in  his  plan  to  colonize  a  land  where  only  one 
God  should  be  worshiped,  and  where  moral  corruption  should 

*  Joseph.  Antiqu.   T,  vii,  2. 


CHAPTER    I.  5 

be  unknown;  for  owing  to  the  low  state  of  culture  of  the 
ground,  a  famine  broke  out,  and  lie  was  obliged  to  seek  a  land. 
where  the  art  of  agriculture  had  obliged  nature  to  produee 
plenty.  Such  a  land  was  Egypt;  and  Abram  crossing  the 
Isthmus  of  Suez  arrived  in  Egypt. 

Abram  "  afraid  of  the  madness  of  the  Egyptians  with  regard 
to  women,"  as  Josephus  said,  and  aware  that  homicide  was 
not  considered  as  atrocious  a  crime  as  adultery,  begged  of  his 
wife  Sarai  to  say  she  was  his  sister,  which  she  and  also  Abram 
did.  The  fame  of  her  beauty  reached  the  royal  palace,  and 
Sarai  was  taken  into  the  harem  of  the  then  reigning  Pharaoh, 
who  was  favorably  disposed  to  Abram  on  account  of  his  sup- 
posed sister.  Abram  became  very  rich  in  Egypt,  not  only 
in  herds  and  flocks,  but  also  in  slaves,  gold  and  silver.  In 
what  way  he  acquired  his  wealth  is  not  told  in  the  Bible ;  nor 
does  Josephus  tell  us  anything,  but  that  Pharaoh  made  him  a 
large  present  in  money. 

When  Pharaoh  wished  to  enjoy  his  prize,  he  was  plagued 
with  distemper;  upon  which  he  made  inquiry  about  Sarai,  and 
he  was  told  that  she  was  the  wife  of  Abram.  After  Abram 
had  told  him  the  cause  of  representing  her  to  be  his  sister, 
Sarai  was  restored  to  him,  and,  according  to  the  Bible,  he  was 
sent  off  from  the  country;  but  according  to  Josephus,  Pharaoh 
gave  him  leave  to  enter  into  conversation  with  the  most 
learned  among  the  Egyptians,  which  Abram  did.  After  having 
refuted  the  priests  of  the  different  sects,  he  communicated  to 
them  the  science  of  Arithmetic  and  Astronomy ;  "for,  before 
Abram  came  into  Egypt,  they  were  unacquainted  with  those 
parts  of  learning;  for  those  sciences  came  from  the  Chaldeans 
into  Egypt,  and  from  thence  to  the  Greeks  also." 

Wealthy  and  admired,  the  patriarch  departed  from  Egypt, 
returning  to  that  part  of  Canaan  of  which  he  had  taken  pos- 
session, and  which  he  considered  his  own,  and  pitched  again 
his  tents  between  Beth  El  and  Ai.  But  the  wealth  of  Abram 
and  his  nephew  Lot  had  so  increased,  that  the  pasture 
became  insufficient  for  their  numerous  herds,  which  led  to 
frequent  strife  between  the  herdsmen  of  the  two  sheiks.    Abram 


O  PERIOD     I. 

proposed  to  Lot,  that  they  should  separate  from  each  other, 
leaving  him  free  choice  where  to  settle.  Lot  chose  the  fertile 
plains  of  Jordan  for  his  part,  and  moved  with  his  herds  as  far 
down  as  the  city  of  Sedom.  Lot  was  the  adopted  son  and  heir' 
of  Abram,  wherefore  it  grieved  the  patriarch  that  he  now  stood 
in  the  world  without  an  heir,  apprehending  that  he  would  not 
be  able  to  transmit  his  principles  and  sublime  doctrines  to  pos- 
terity. But  grand  schemes  arise  only  in  great  hearts,  which  are 
possessed  of  a  buoyancy  that  never  can  be  impoverished.  Only 
for  a  moment  the  patriarch  was  discouraged;  the  next  moment 
he  perceived  again  the  divine  voice  promising  him  good  suc- 
cess; he  is  told,  that  he  and  his  children  will  possess  this 
land  as  far  as  he  sees  it ;  that  his  seed  will  be  innumerable  as 
the  dust  of  the  ground.  Abram  again  encouraged,  traveled 
through  the  land  as  far  south  as  the  plain  of  Mamra,  which  is 
before  Hebron ;  and  also  there  he  found  the  land  unoccupied. 
He  built  again  an  altar  to  the  God  in  whose  name  he  claimed 
the  land.  He  was  now  in  possession  of  a  fertile  tract  of  land 
on  the  west  side  of  the  Jordan,  including  the  beautiful  regions 
of  Shiloh,  Jerusalem,  Jericho,  and  Bethlehem. 

The  land  of  Sedom,  now  the  residence  of  Lot,  was  in  a  state 
of  dependency  on  Kedarleomer,  king  of  Elam.  The  king  of 
Sedom,  together  with  four  neighboring  princes,  refused  obe- 
dience to  Kedarleomer,  upon  which  he  came  with  three  allies 
in  order  to  enforce  obedience.  The  five  kings  resisted,  but 
they  were  routed  in  a  pitched  battle,  in  the  valley  of  Siddim. 
Kedarleomer  took  many  captives,  among  whom  also  was  Lot. 
No  sooner  had  Abram  heard  of  the  fate  of  his  nephew,  than  he 
hastened  to  his  rescue.  Three  hundred  and  eighteen  trained  men 
composed  his  whole  army  which  he  could  raise  with  the  aid  of 
his  allies,  Aner,  Eshcol  and  Mamra;  nevertheless,  he  pursued 
the  enemy  as  far  as  Dan.  Dividing  his  army,  according  to 
ancient  stratagem,  into  two  files,  he  surprised  the  enemy  at 
night,  and  achieved  a  signal  victory,  driving  the  enemy  before 
him  as  far  as  Hobah,  near  Damascus,  and  recapturing  not  only 
Lot  and  his  substances,  but  also  the  captives  and  the  sub- 
stances taken  of  the  king  of  Sedom  and  his  allies.     Whci» 


CHAPTER    I.  7 

returning,  Malkisedek,  king  of  Salem,  the  priest  of  the  chief 
Deity  (Zeus,  Adonis  or  Saturnus)  who  had  a  claim  upon  the 
tenth  part  of  all  persons  and  things  taken  in  war.  came  out 
with  bread  and  wine  to  meet  the  returning  hero;  and  after 
having  blessed  him,  he  made  him  a  present  with  the  tithe  due 
unto  him,  which  Abram  accepted  in  order  to  return  it  to 
the  rightful  owner.  For  soon  after  the  king  of  Sedom  came 
to  meet  the  patriarch,  proposing  to  him  to  return  the  persons 
recaptured  and  to  keep  the  substance.  But  Abram  whose 
intention  was  merely  to  rescue  Lot,  refused  to  keep  anything; 
only  his  allies  should  take  their  portion. 

Abram  crowned  also  with  military  fame  had  returned  to  his 
tent,  where  he  reflected  on  what  he  had  done.  He  had  now  a 
powerful  enemy,  who  might  surprise  him  in  the  same  way 
as  he  had  surprised  him;  but  the  voice,  which  encouraged 
him  ever  since  he  departed  from  his  native  land,  again  encou- 
raged him,  promising  him  great  rewards  for  the  noble  actions 
just  committed,  saving  his  kinsman  and  restoring  to  the  king 
of  Sedom  all  that  was  his. 

Abram  grew  old;  his  hope  to  transmit  his  divine  views  to  a 
son,  and  thus  preserve  them  in  his  tribe,  grew  fainter.  His 
wife  Sarai,  perceiving  the  grief  of  her  husband,  gave  him  her 
handmaid  Hagar,  the  Egyptian,  for  a  wife,  who  conceived  of 
Abram,  and  when  he  was  eighty-six  years  old  he  had  the 
pleasure  of  embracing  his  own  son,  whom  he  called  Ishmael 
(Yishma-el,  God  will  hear),  God  will  hear  him,  that  also 
Sarai  may  embrace  a  son,  and  that  his  plans  be  realized. 

When  Abram  had  a  male  issue  all  his  hopes  were  renewed, 
he  saw  now  the  possibility  to  realize  his  plan.  He  had  in 
possession  sufficient  land;  he  was  sufficiently  rich  and  powerful 
to  maintain  his  independence;  and  so  he  thought  of  means  to 
keep  his  tribe  separated  from  the  idolatrous  nations  around 
him.  Again  he  perceived  the  divine  voice,  which  always 
cherished  him,  directing  him  to  introduce  circumcision  among 
his  tribe — which  he  probably  saw  in  Egypt — which  should  be 
the  sign  of  the  covenant  between  God  and  his  tribe,  by  virtue 
of  which  he  has  a  lawful  claim  to  the  land  which  he  has  taken 


g  PERIOD    I. 

in  possession  for  him  and  his  descendants,  in  order  to  establish 
a  nation  which  worship    the  Almighty  God.      Abram    intro- 
duced  this  custom   among  his    tribe,    and  it  was  a  law  that 
whoever  neglected  this  custom,  should  be  excluded  from  his 
tribe.     Being  now  separated  from  the  other  nations  by  virtue 
of  an  external  mark,  he  also  changed  his  and  his  wife's  name 
into  Abraham    and    Sarah,    considering   himself  now  entered 
into  a  new  covenant  with  God,  which  thus  powerfully  effected 
him,  that  also  the  hope  of  a  male  issue  by  his  legitimate  wife 
Sarah  revived  in  his  heart,  although  he  could  not  yet  perceive 
the  possibility,  whereas  he  was  already  ninety-nine  years  of 
age.     Three  mysterious   strangers  happening  to  come  to  him, 
whom  he  treated  with  Arabian  hospitality,  also  told  him  that 
Sarah  his  wife  would  give   birth   to  a  male  child.     Abraham 
going  with  his  guests,  who  went  towards  Sedom,  "to  bring 
them  on  the  way,"   was  told  by  the    Lord — probably  by  the 
shakes   of  the   earthquake   or  by  the  roar  of  the  distant  thun- 
der— that  he  will  destroy  the  cities  of  Sedom  and  Gemarah, 
on  account  of  the  wickedness  of  their  inhabitants.    He  prayed 
to  God  for  the  wicked  and  sinful  people,  in  which  prayer  his 
no]ble  heart   is   fully  reflected;    but  when  he  came  the  other 
morning  to  the  same  place,  he  saw  the  smoke  ascending  from  a 
Dead  Sea,  which  was  the  memorial  of  flourishing  but  sinful 
cities.     Lot  and  his  two  daughters  were  saved,  his  wife  he 
lost;  and  having  escaped  into   the  mountains,  they  were  sepa- 
rated from  the  rest  of  mankind,  and  therefore  supposing  all 
mankind  had  expired,  conceived  in  incest  from  their  father; 
the  two  sons  thus  conceived,  became  the  progenitors  of  Amnion 
and  Moab. 

Abraham — probably  terrified  by  the  noise  and  shakes  of  the 
earthquake  at  the  destruction  of  Sedom — traveled  southwest 
into  the  land  of  Phelistia.  The  powerful  sheik  was  not  wel- 
come to  the  Phelistines;  and  although  they  ventured  no  active 
hostility  against  him,  still  they  injured  him  wherever  they 
could.  Abraham  took  possession  of  the  unoccupied  lands,  and 
digged  wells,  as  a  mark  of  his  having  taken  possession  of  the 
land,  which   the   Phelistines   destroyed    or  robbed  from  him. 


God,  however,  indemnified  the  pious  Abraham;  for  his  wife 
Sarah  gave  birth  to  the  long  expected  legitimate  heir,  Sarah 
said,  whoever  will  hear  it  will  laugh  at  me,  for  she  was  nine 1 3 
and  Abraham  was  an  hundred  years  old,  when  this  son  was 
born;  and  Abraham  named  his  son  Isaac  (Yitsehak,  he  will 
laugh  or  rejoice).  Sarah,  who  disliked  that  her  son  should 
divide  his  rich  inheritance  with  the  son  of  her  handmaid, 
induced  her  husband  to  send  away  Hagar  and  her  son.  which 
Abram  did  in  order  to  maintain  the  peace  of  his  house. 
Hagar  and  Ishmael  went  off  towards  the  wilderness,  where 
she  lost  the  way.  And  when  the  water  was  gone  from  the 
bottle,  she  saw  her  .child  exposed  to  the  most  horrible  kind  of 
death.  Still,  an  angel — probably  the  sound  of  a  rivulet  flowing 
from  a  well — showed  her  a  well  of  water,  by  which  she  and 
her  child  were  saved.  The  poetical  beauty  of  that  passage 
can  not  be  imitated,  and  we  must  refer  the  reader  to  the  ori- 
ginal (Genesis  xxi,  14-21). 

Abimelech,  informed  of  the  troubles  existing  between  his 
subjects  and  the  powerful  Abraham,  went  to  the  latter  to  have 
him  enter  with  him  into  a  covenant  of  friendship;  for  the 
alliance  of  a  sheik  who  had  subdued  the  powerful  Kedarleomer, 
was  of  no  little  importance.  Abimelech  bestowed  upon  the 
patriarch  considerable  presents  in  money,  cattle  and  slaves, 
and  confirmed  his  right  of  possessing  the  land  which  he 
occupied.  And  so  Abraham  entered  into  a  covenant  of  friend- 
ship with  the  king  of  the  Phelistines,  which  was  to  last  for 
three  generations,  including  the  present  one.  The  place  where 
this  covenant  was  made  was  called  Bear  Shaba  (the  well  of 
swearing).  After  Abimelech  had  returned  to  his  home,  Abraham 
planted  a  grove  on  that  place,  to  commemorate  the  covenant 
into  which  he  had  entered  with  the  chief  of  the  land;  and  he 
claimed  the  soil  he  had  occupied,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord. 

Abraham  sojourned  in  Phelistia  a  long  time.  In  this  land, 
where  the  manners  and  customs  of  the  Phoenicians  were  much 
practiced,  Abraham  saw  the  horrid  custom  of  man-sacrifice ; 
and  the  idea  arose  in  his  mind,  to  demonstrate  his  inexpressible 
love  towards  God  by  sacrificing  his  own  son  to  his  God.     And 


10  PERIOD    I. 

the  divine  voice,  which  was  constantly  with  him,  expressively 
demanded  of  him  to  do  so.  It  was  not  a  momentary  ecstasy 
leading  Abraham  to  this  step;  for  he  made  long  preparations 
and  traveled  nearly  three  days  before  he  reached  the  solitary 
Moriah.  which  was  the  spot  appointed  for  this  awful  sacrifice. 
Arrived  there,  he  built  the  altar,  prepared  the  wood,  bound 
his  son.  and  had  already  stretched  out  his  hand  to  take  the 
knife,  which  he  had  prepared  to  sacrifice  his  beloved  son,  when 
an  angel  of  the  Lord — -probably  the  paternal  love — prevented 
him  from  accomplishing  his  pious  design,  assuring  him,  that 
the  resolute  will  to  sacrifice  even  his  own  son,  is  a  convincing 
proof  of  his  fearing  the  Lord.  When  Abraham  had  sacrificed 
a  ram,  instead  of  his  son  Isaac,  the  same  voice — it  was  not  as 
general  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  but  that  of  an  angel — assured 
him  that  the  Lord  has  sworn  by  himself,  to  bless  him  by  mul- 
tiplying his  seed  to  be  as  innumerable  as  the  stars  of  heaven 
and  the  sand  of  the  sea  shore ;  that  his  seed,  by  whom  all  the 
nations  of  the  earth  will  be  blessed,  will  inherit  the  gates  of 
his  enemies.  This  blessing  related  more  to  Isaac  than  to 
Abraham  personally;  for  the  trial  concerned  the  life  of  Isaac. 
Abraham,  who  saw  his  son  willing  to  die  for  his  God,  was 
probably  the  angel  of  the  Lord  who  promised  this  blessed 
future  to  his  pious  son.  Father  and  son  returned  joyously  to 
their  home,  Bear  Shaba,  and  Abraham  was  delivered  from  a 
horrid  practice  which  was  common  with  his  neighbors,  the 
sacrifice  of  man;  and  thus  this  practice  was  abolished  among 
the  tribe  of  Abraham.  In  order  to  withdraw  his  tribe  from  the 
influence  of  the  horrid  superstitions  of  the  Phelistines,  which 
had  nearly  misled  him  to  sacrifice  his  own  son,  Abraham  left 
this  place  and  returned  to  his  former  home  in  the  vicinity  of 
Hebron;  but  when  arrived  at  Hebron,  his  wife  died  at  the  age 
of  127  years.  He  had  no  piece  of  land  (for  he  occupied  the 
valleys)  wThich  was  fit  to  inter  the  remains  of  his  wife  in  the 
same  honorable  manner  as  was  common  among  the  Egyptians ; 
wherefore  he  bought  a  cave  and  a  tract  of  land  of  Ephron  the 
Hitite,  where  he  interred  the  body  of  his  wife.  The  land  was 
bought  and   paid  for  in   the   presence  of  many  witnesses,  so 


CHAPTER    I.  II 

that  Abraham's  right  to  this  property  was  indisputable.  The 
next  care  of  Abraham  was  to  prevent  the  amalgamation  of 
his  son  Isaac  with  the  daughters  of  the  land,  whereas  lie 
wished  to  have  his  tribe  entirely  separated  from  them  and  their 
superstitious  practices.  He  therefore  dispatched  the  steward  of 
his  house,  Eliezer,  of  Damascus,  to  go  to  his  family  in  Aram 
Naharaim  or  Padan  Aram,  to  bring  a  wife  for  his  son  Isaac, 
out  of  the  tribe  of  Terah.  The  steward  after  having  sealed 
his  promise  by  a  solemn  oath,  took  ten  camels  and  plenty  of 
jewels  and  other  precious  things,  and  went  to  the  city  of  Naliar, 
where  a  lucky  chance  brought  him  into  the  house  of  Bethuel, 
son  of  Nahar,  the  brother  of  Abraham.  Here  he  obtained  for 
the  son  of  his  master,  the  fair  Rebecca,  daughter  of  Bethuel, 
who  by  permission  of  her  parents  and  brother,  went  with  the 
steward.  Isaac  impatiently  awaiting  the  arrival  of  his  bride, 
was  gone  out  in  the  field,  when  he  met  the  returning  servant, 
bringing  him  the  blushing  bride,  who  had  covered  her  face  with 
a  veil,  when  she  was  informed  that  she  is  met  with  her  be- 
trothed. Isaac  brought  her  into  the  tent  of  his  mother  Sarah 
— the  tent  of  the  mistress  of  the  tribe — and  he  loved  her,  and 
was  consoled  after  Sarah  his  mother. 

Abraham  had  taken  another  wife,  after  Isaac  was  married, 
whose  name  was  Keturah.  The  six  sons  which  this  wife  had 
born  unto  him,  and  also  the  sons  of  his  concubines,  were  sent 
off  to  the  east  and  west  with  rich  gifts,  so  that  none  could 
claim  the  right  of  inheriting  the  wealth  and  the  power  of 
Abraham  but  his  faithful  and  legitimate  son  Isaac,  whom  Abra- 
ham had  appointed  to  be  his  heir  and  successor,  as  sheik  of  the 
tribe. 

When  Abraham  was  175  years  old,  he  died  (1810  b.  c.)  and 
was  gathered  unto  his  people,  bequeathing  to  his  son  a  power- 
ful tribe,  large  and  fertile  tracts  of  land,  numerous  herds  and 
herdsmen,  treasures  of  silver  and  gold,  and,  what  was  most 
important,  a  glorious  name,  and  a  mental  treasure,  which  he 
could  confidently  deposit  with  his  pious  and  faithful  son.  who 
was  willing  to  be  sacrificed  before  the  God  to  whose  glory 
lather   Abraham   had  left   his   family  and  established  an  inde- 


L2  PERIOD    1 1 

pendent  tribe  in  a  foreign  land.  Abraham,  who  was  buried  by 
Isaac  and  Ishmacl  on  the  side  of  his  wife  Sarah,  in  the  cave 
of  Machpelah,  had  realized  his  wishes.  He  had  Rift  a  powerful 
and  rich  tribe  to  a  son,  who  was  possessed  of  the  same  sacred 
ideas  and  noble  principles,  which  made  Abraham  a  great  and 
far-renowned  man;  so  that  even  in  our  days  many  an  oriental 
tribe  proudly  calls  itself  descendants  of  Abraham;  and  none 
can  say  with  any  degree  of  certainty,  that  the  Brahma  of  the 
Hindus  is  not  father  Abraham,  who  sent  his  sons  to  the  east, 
and  who  may  have  bequeathed  his  name  to  the  former  inha- 
bitants of  Hindustan.  The  Israelite  and  the  Arab  bow  down 
with  reverence  at  the  mention  of  the  virtues  of  their  first  sire ; 
and  the  civilized  nations  on  the  globe,  believing  in  a  revealed 
religion,  bless  his  memory. 

ISAAC. 

There  is  nothing  extraordinary  or  truly  great  in  the  life  of 
this  patriarch.  He  was  one  of  those  happy  men,  who  live  on 
the  wealth  and  reputation  of  their  fathers.  He  was  a  pious 
worshiper  of  the  God  of  his  father;  he  faithfully  imitated  the 
patriarchal  virtues,  as  well  as  the  ordinary  mode  of  living  and 
acting  of  his  father,  and  is  remarkable  as  an  obedient  son.  He 
was  also  a  tender  spouse,  and,  it  would  appear  to  us,  a  very 
feeble  father. 

When  Abraham  was  no  more,  Isaac  moved  to  Bear  Lahai 
Roi,  which  is  between  Kadash  and  Barad,  remarkable  as  being 
the  place  where  the  messenger  of  Abraham  overtook  Hagar, 
when  fleeing  before  Sarah  her  mistress.  The  causes  of  this 
moving  are  not  stated  in  the  Bible;  most  likely  it  was  done  to 
the  end  of  appropriating  new  tracts  of  land.  Previously  to  this, 
fifteen  years  before  the  death  of  Abraham,  Rebecca  was  delivered 
of  twin  brothers,  the  first  of  which  looking  rough  and  haired 
was  called  Esau  (Esov,  the  finished);  the  second,  holding  the 
heels  of  his  brother,  was  called  Jacob  (Ya'akof,  he  will  hold 
the  heel).  The  two  lads  differed  widely  in  temperament  and 
character.  Esau  was  a  friend  of  the  chase  and  war,  and  loved 
the  free  field;  while  Jacob  was  an  innocent  youth,  who  pre- 


CH  U'TKR    I.  13 

ferred  peace  to  war,  who  loved  his  solitary  tent  better  than  the 
roaming  in  the  wild  deserts.  Jacob  was  therefore  the  favorite 
of  his  mother;  but  the  father  felt  more  inclined  to  the  rough 

hunter,  whom  he  supposed  might  one  day  become  a  powerful 
leader  of  the  tribe  when  he  himself  would  be  no  more.  Both 
of  them,  it  appears,  grew  up  without  much  guidance  of  their 
father,  being  left  almost  entirely  to  their  own  will  and  inclina- 
tions. Jacob  had  once  prepared  a  pottage  when  Esau  returned 
from  a  chase  weary  and  hungry.  Esau  desired  Jacob  to  give 
him  part  of  the  red  pottage,  wherefore  he  was  nicknamed 
Edom  (the  red).  Jacob  gave  him  part  of  it,  and  when  Esau 
rejoiced  over  his  meal,  Jacob  asked  of  him  to  sell  him  his 
birthright;  for  the  firstborn  of  the  tribe  became  sheik  after 
the  demise  of  the  father,  if  he  had  not  particular  reasons  to 
appoint  a  younger  brother,  as  Abraham  did  with  Isaac,  because 
he  was  the  son  of  his  legitimate  wife.  Esau  replied  that  he 
did  not  care  for  his  birthright,  whereas  he  is  exposed  to  death 
every  step  he  goes,  being  either  opposite  a  ferocious  beast  or  a 
revengeful  enemy ;  and  therefore  he  sold  his  birthright  to  Jacob ; 
the  price,  however,  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Bible.  This  bar- 
gain remained  a  secret  with  the  two  brothers. 

A  famine  which  occurred  while  Isaac  lived  in  Bear  Leeha 
Roi,  obliged  him  to  leave  his  place;  intending  to  go  to  Egypt, 
as  his  father  had  done  under  similar  circumstances,  he  came  to 
Geror,  in  Phelistia,  where  he  may  have  found  plenty  of  pasture 
for  his  cattle,  and  therefore  he  heard  for  the  first  time  the 
same  divine  voice,  which  had  accompanied  his  father,  ordering 
him  not  to  leave  the  land,  renewing  to  him  the  promises 
repeatedly  given  to  Abraham,  that  his  seed  will  be  as  innume- 
rable as  the  stars  of  the  heaven,  that  they  will  possess  this 
land,  and  will  be  a  cause  of  blessing  to  all  nations.  Isaac 
went  from  his  former  home  with  the  intention  to  go  to  Egypt, 
and  in  this  respect  he  also  imitated  his  lather,  as  he  repre- 
sented his  wife  to  be  his  sister.  But  not  being  cautious  enough 
with  his  tenderness,  he  was  soon  detected  to  be  the  husband  of 
the  fair  Rebecca,  wherefore  the  king  of  the  Phelistines,  after 
he  had  heard  Isaac's  reason  for  this  misrepresentation,  espe- 


14  PERIOD    I. 

daily  commanded,  remembering  the  covenant  with  Abraham, 
"  Whosoever  touches  this  man  or  his  wife,  shall  be  put  to 
death."  It  appears  that  agricultural  pursuits  were  more  com- 
mon in  this  part  of  the  country,  being  mere  thickly  settled, 
than  in  those  parts  further  distant  from  the  sea,  and  so  Isaac, 
too,  yielding  to  the  general  occupation  of  the  people,  tried  his 
strength  in  agriculture.  He  was  very  fortunate  in  this  em- 
ployment; the  harvests  were  rich,  and  the  wealth  of  Isaac 
materially  increased.  But  he  had  no  claim  to  the  land  which 
he  possessed;  for  the  only  marks  of  occupation,  which  his 
father  had  made,  the  wells  he  had  digged,  the  Phelistines  had 
destroyed  and  filled  with  earth.  Therefore  Abimelech  supposed 
he  had  a  right  to  drive  away  the  powerful  sheik,  whose  per- 
petually increasing  wealth  and  power  became  dangerous  to  him. 
Isaac  was  obliged  to  move  down  the  valley  of  Geror,  where  he 
reopened  the  wells  which  his  father  had  digged,  and  the  Phelis- 
tines had  destroyed;  but  also  this  possession  was  protested,  so 
that  he  had  to  move  from  place  to  place,  until  he  finally  arrived 
at  Bear  Shaba ;  there  he  found  the  grove  which  his  father  had 
planted;  this  was  an  unquestionable  mark  of  occupation,  and 
none  could  contest  his  claim  on  this  part  of  the  country.  There 
he  heard  again  the  divine  voice  which  had  spoken  to  his  father 
Abraham,  which  now  encouraged  him  and  promised  him  the 
divine  assistance;  there  he  digged  a  well,  and  none  protested 
against  it;  and  therefore  he  pitched  there  his  tent,  built  an 
altar,  and  claimed  the  land  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.  Abimelech 
came  afterwards  to  Isaac  to  renew  the  covenant  of  friendship 
existing  between  the  Phelistines  and  the  family  of  Isaac.  Isaac 
received  him  well  and  entertained  him.  The  covenant  was 
renewed,  the  place  was  again  named  Bear  Shaba,  Abimelech 
returned  home  satisfied,  and  Isaac  remained  unmolested  in  pos- 
session of  the  land  inherited  from  his  father. 

Isaac  had  grown  old  and  blind,  and  consequently  he  was 
disabled  to  be  any  longer  an  efficient  chief  of  his  tribe ;  he 
therefore  resolved  upon  resigning  his  power  to  his  first  born 
son  Esau,  not  knowing  that  he  had  sold  his  claim  to  Jacob.  To 
this  end  it  was  that  he  called  Esau,   bidding  him  to  hunt  a 


CHAPER    I.  15 

venison,  to  make  of  it  savory  meat  as  he  loves  it,  to  bring  it 
to  him,  and  when  his  mind  will  be  pleased  by  the  enjoyment 
of  the  well-tasting  meal  lie  will  bestow  his  blessing  on  him, 
which  is  the  formal  acknowledgment  of  his  right  of  succession 
to  the  wealth  and  power  of  his  father.  Esau  obeyed,  and  went 
into  the  field.  Rebecca  had  heard  these  words  of  her  husband, 
and  knowing  that  the  word  of  the  patriarch  was  an  irrevocable 
decree,  she  had  not  the  courage  to  oppose  the  will  of  her  hus- 
band by  words.  '  Knowing  also,  that  every  act,  after  being 
done,  wTas  regarded  by  the  patriarchs  as  an  act  of  Providence, 
she  thought  of  leading  Isaac  to  acknowledge  Jacob  as  his  suc- 
cessor in  one  way  or  other,  which,  if  once  done,  he  would  not 
reclaim.  Isaac  was  weak  enough  to  pay  no  regard  to  the 
faults  of  Esau;  but  Rebecca  knew,  that  while  father  Abraham 
had  established  an  independent  tribe  in  order  to  realize  his 
principles  and  ideas  regarding  God  and  virtue,  and  to  which 
end  he  separated  himself  entirely  from  the  surrounding  tribes ; 
Esau  paid  no  attention  to  this  fundamental  principle  of  his 
tribe,  and  took  in  marriage  two  women  of  the  tribe  of  the 
Hitites,  who  were  a  grief  of  heart  to  Isaac  and  to  Rebecca. 
While  Abraham  and  Isaac  held  a  peacable  superiority  over  the 
aborigines,  and  endeavored  to  improve  the  manners  and  sen- 
timents of  the  tribe  by  pastoral  and  agricultural  pursuits, 
withdrawing  the  men  of  the  tribe  altogether  from  savage 
employments;  Esau  was  a  warlike  and  unsteady  hunter,  who, 
if  becoming  chief  of  the  tribe  would  destroy  the  beautiful  work 
which  his  fathers  painfully  constructed.  While  Jacob  on  the 
other  side  appeared  to  her — mothers  do  not  see  the  smaller 
faults  of  their  sons — to  have  the  mild  disposition,  the  pious 
sentiments,  the  steady  habits,  and  the  good  will  which  are 
requisite  to  govern  the  tribe  in  the  sense  of  Abraham  and  Isaac. 
She  therefore  resorted  to  a  deception  in  order  to  save  the  tribe. 
She,  after  having  told  her  favorite  son  the  words  of  his  father 
to  Esau,  bid  him  bring  two  good  kids  of  the  goats,  of  which 
she  would  make  savory  meat ;  this  Jacob  should  bring  to  his 
father,  and  pretending  to  be  Esau,  he  will  obtain  the  father's 
blessing.     Jacob  reluctantly  obeyed;  he  disguised  himself  with 


10  PERTOD    I. 

the  skins  of  the  kids,  and  brought  the  savory  meat  to  the  father, 
pretending  to  have  obeyed  his  command.     The  father  suspected 
him,  and  endeavored  in  different  ways  to  convince  himself  that 
the  aspirant  really  was  his  son  Esau.     The  old  patriarch  really 
supposed  to  have  before  him  his  son  Esau,  wherefore  he  ate 
of  the  savory  meat  and  also  did  drink  of  the  wine  set  before 
him.     He  then  called  his  son  to  draw  near  and  kiss  him,  which 
Jacob  did.     Isaac  smelling  the   odor  of  his   garments  blessed 
him.    "  See,  the  smell  of  my  son  is  as  the  smell  of  a  field  which 
the  Lord  has  blessed;  therefore  God  give  thee  of  the  dew  of 
heaven  and  of  the  fatness  of  the  earth,  and  plenty  of  corn  and 
wine.     Let  people  serve  thee,  and  nations  bow  down  unto  thee; 
be  lord  over  thy  brethren,  and  let  thy  mother's  sons  bow  down 
to  thee;  cursed  be  everyone  that  curses  thee,  and  blessed  be  he 
that  blesses  thee."     This  blessing  plainly  indicates,  that  Isaac 
was  much  inclined  to  agriculture,  and  desired  his  successor  to 
adhere  to  this  noble  employment,  the  only  basis  of  civilization. 
The  second  part  of  the  blessing,  and  more  especially  the  words, 
be  lord   over  thy  brethren,  &c,  plainly  shows  that  this  paternal 
blessing  was  intended  as  a  formal  appointment  of  a  successor 
to  govern  the  tribe;  which   dignity  was  now  bestowed  upon 
Jacob.      When  Jacob  Jiad  left  his  father,  Esau  returned  and 
brought   savory  meat  to  his  father.     When  offering  the  meat  to 
his  father,  the  latter  asked  him,  who  he  was?     The  answer, 
"  I  am  Esau,  thy  first  born  son,"  was  a  cause  of  extreme  terror 
to  Isaac,  who   supposed  some  impostor  may  have  snatched  his 
blessing,  still  he   exclaimed,  "And  he  shall  be  blessed;"  for  it 
was  done,  consequently  it  was  the  will  of  Providence  that  it  be 
so.   While,  however,  Esau  bitterly  complained  before  his  father, 
and  entreated  him  to  bless  him  too,  Isaac  remembered  the  voice 
of  Jacob,  and  told  his  son  that  it  was  his  brother  Jacob  who 
cunningly  obtained  his  blessing.    Esau  now  bitterly  complained 
about  the  artfulness   of  his  brother,  who  had  taken  his  birth- 
right and  now  took   also  his  blessing.     Isaac   moved  by  the 
injustice  done  to  Esau,  told  him — which  confirms  our  view  on 
the  nature  of  his   blessing — "  Behold,   I  have  made  him   thy 
lord,  and  all  his  brethren  have  I  given  to  him  for  servants;  and 


CHAPTER    I.  17 

with  corn  and  wine  have  I  sustained  him,  and  what  shall  I  do 
now  unto  thee,  my  son?"  When  Esau  again  entreated  his 
father  to  Mess  him,  and  even  wept,  the  rough  and  hearty- 
hunter  wept  before  his  father,  Isaac  took  this  happy  occasion 
to  recall  his  son  to  his  favorite  employment,  to  agriculture;  to 
withdraw  him  from  his  savage  employment ;  and  to  teach  him 
subordination  to  the  head  of  the  tribe.  He  said  unto  him, 
"  Behold,  thy  dwelling  shall  be  of  the  fatness  of  the  earth,  and 
of  the  dew  of  heaven  from  above.  And  also  by  thy  sword 
thou  mayest  live ;  but  thou  shalt  serve  thy  brother ;  and  it  shall 
come  to  pass  as  thou  wilt  submit,  so  wilt  thou  break  his  yoke 
from  off  thy  neck."  But  Isaac's  paternal  words  had  no  effect 
upon  the  heart  of  Esau;  for  he  intended  to  kill  his  brother, 
in  order  to  obtain  the  dominion  over  the  tribe.  He  knew  well 
enough,  if  he  should  commit  this  outrageous  action  in  the 
lifetime  of  his  father  it  would  be  of  no  avail ;  for  he  would  be 
excommunicated  from  the  tribe,  wherefore  he  postponed  it,  till 
after  the  demise  of  his  father. 

Rebecca  having  been  informed  of  the  evil  intentions  of  her 
eldest  -son,  consequently  advised  Jacob  to  go  to  Laban,  her 
brother,  and  stay  there  until  the  wrath  of  his  brother  should 
subside,  to  which  Jacob  consented.  But  she,  not  wishing  to 
grieve  Isaac  by  informing  him  of  the  evil  intentions  of  Esau, 
desired  him  to  send  Jacob  to  Mesopotamia,  in  order  to  take  a 
wife  of  the  family  of  Bethuel,  to  which  Isaac  consented.  He 
bade  his  son  go  to  Mesopotamia  and  choose  a  wife  among  the 
daughters  of  Laban;  and  after  he  had  blessed  him,  that  God 
may  give  to  him  and  his  seed  the  land  which  He  has  given  to 
Abraham,  Jacob  left  the  house  of  his  father  to  go  to  Meso- 
potamia. When  Esau  perceived  that  his  wives  were  displeasing 
to  the  sight  of  his  parents,  on  account  of  their  Hitite  origin, 
he  took  in  marriage  the  daughter  of  Ismael,  in  order  to  -regain 
the  favor  of  his  parents.  But  it  appears  he  did  not  succeed 
in  his  design;  for  he  soon  left  his  father,  and  established  an 
independent  tribe  in  the  land  of  Seir.  It  appears  from  the 
sources  before  us,  that  Isaac  left  his  estate  in  Bear  Shaba,  and 
returned  to  the  plain  of  Mamra,  where  Esau,  probably  in  com- 
2 


18  PERIOD    I. 

pany  with  the  warlike  portion  of  the  tribe,  fell  into  the  land 
south  of  the  plain  of  Mamra,  which  was  inhabited  by  Horim 
(Troglodytes),  who  were  easily  overcome  and  subjected  to  the 
dominion  of  Esau.  The  conquerors  and  the  aborigines  jointly 
occupied  the  land,  which  was  now  called  Edom,  after  the  name 
of  the  conqueror,  who  had  in  the  land  fifteen  princes  of  thou- 
sands, while  the  aborigines  had  but  seven  such  princes,  which 
shows  the  superiority  of  the  power  of  the  former.  The  tribe 
of  Isaac,  after  the  separation  from  Esau  and  probably  the 
majority  of  the  young  men  from  it,  being  under  the  guidance 
of  an  old  and  blind  man,  seems  to  have  become  insignificant, 
so  that  nothing  transpired  which  was  of  sufficient  importance  to 
be  recorded  by  the  ancient  historian. 

JACOB. 

Jacob  had  left,  probably  for  the  first  time,  the  friendly  and 
comfortable  tent  of  his  mother,  and  traversed  the  mountains 
of  Palestine  to  reach  the  Euphrates,  in  order  to  cometoHaran, 
the  end  of  his  journey.  How  the  last  words  of  his  father, 
"And  He  may  bestow  upon  thee  the  blessing  of  Abraham," 
reechoed  in  his  agitated  mind ;  how  this  idea  was  blended  with 
the  fear  that  his  brother  might  pursue  after  him  and  overtake 
him; '  and  how  again  both  these  ideas  were  accompanied  by  a 
painful  home-sickness,  may  be  learned  from  the  dream  which 
he  had,  when  sleeping  for  the  first  night  after  his  departure 
from  home.  When  at  the  spot  where  afterwards  Beth  El 
stood,  night  overtook  the  traveling  Jacob,  he  took  some  stones 
for  his  pillow,  and  laid  down  to  sleep.  He  dreamed  of  a  ladder 
standing  on  the  earth  and  reaching  with  its  top  up  to  heaven; 
and,  according  to  Josephus,  persons  were  descending  down  the 
ladder,  that  seemed  more  excellent  than  human.  And  the  Lord 
stood  .above  him,  promising  him  the  blessing  of  Abraham  as 
his  father  had  done ;  then  he  promised  to  guard  him  on  his 
way,  and  to  bring  him  home  again  in  safety.  When  Jacob 
awoke,  he  felt  overawed  by  his  nightly  vision;  he  therefore 
poured  oil  on  one  of  the  stones  upon  which  he  laid,  and  erected 
it  as  a  pillar  of  memorial;  he  called  the  place  Beth  El  (house 


CHAPTER    I.  19 

of  God),  the  first  city  however  built  on  this  spot  afterwards 
was  called  Luz.  Jacob  not  knowing  whether  he  had  but  a 
dream  or  a  divine  vision,  vowed  a  vow,  if  God  will  guard  him 
on  his  way  and  bring  him  back  in  peace,  he  would  consider 
this  a  house  of  the  Lord.  "And  of  all  thou  wilt  give  me," 
said  he,  "I  shall  give  ^hee  a  tenth  part;"  probably  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  house  of  the  Lord  which  he  intended  to 
build  there. 

Jacob  continued  his  journey  towards  the  east,  and  having 
arrived  in  the  vicinity  of  the  city  of  Nahar  he  found  three 
shepherds  encamped  with  their  flocks  around  a  well.  Jacob 
was  informed  by  them  that  they  were  from  Nahar;  that  they 
knew  Laban,  who  was  well;  and  that  Rachel  his  daughter  will 
come  with  the  flock  of  her  father,  which  she  tends.  Rachel 
indeed  came,  and  after  Jacob  had  rendered  her  the  service  of 
rolling  off  the  stone  from  the  well,  which  shews  his  physical 
strength  to  the  best  advantage,  he  told  her  with  tears  in  his 
eyes — he  was  yet  not  cured  of  his  home-sickness — that  he  is 
the  son  of  Rebecca.  Rachel  informed  her  father  of  the  arrival 
of  the  unexpected  guest,  who  was  heartily  welcomed  by  Laban. 
Jacob  told  him  the  cause  of  his  flight  from  his  home,  and 
Laban  hospitably  offered  him  his  house.  Jacob  however  did 
not  remain  there  idle,  he  worked,  which  occasioned  Laban  to 
tell  him,  that  he  does  not  expect  him  to  work  without  wages 
because  being  his  relative;  he  desired  him  to  fix  his  own 
wages.  Jacob  proposed  to  serve  seven  years  for  the  fair 
Rachel,  his  youngest  daughter,  which  proposal  Laban  cheer- 
fully accepted.  But  when  the  seven  years  of  service  had 
expired,  Laban  gave  him  his  eldest  daughter  Leah  instead  of 
Rachel;  and  when  Jacob  complained  about  this  deception, 
Laban  excused  himself  by  a  custom  of  the  place,  according  to 
which  the  youngest  is  not  permitted  to  be  married  before  the 
eldest.  Laban  now  proposed  to  give  him  also  his  daughter 
Rachel  on  condition  of  serving  him  seven  years  more,  which 
condition  was  accepted  by  the  patriarch,  who  had  now  two 
wives,  Rachel  and  Leah,  to  each  of  whom  was  given  a  hand- 
maid, Zilpah  was  given  to  Leah,  and  Bilhah  to  Rachel.    When 


20  PERIOD    I. 

Leah  was  blessed  with  children  and  Rachel  the  favorite  wife 
of  the  patriarch  was  childless,  the  latter  desired  her  husband 
to  beget  children  by  Bilhah  her  handmaid,  which  she  would 
consider  her   own  children.     Jacob  complied  with  her  wishes. 
But  no  sooner  Leah  perceived  that  her  sister  obtained  children 
by  her  handmaid,  than  she  also  desired  her  husband  to  beget 
children  by  her  handmaid  Zilpah.     Jacob  complied  also  with 
her   wishes.     So   the  patriarch  had  children  of  four  mothers. 
This  simple  narrative,  and  the  one  of  Hagar  given  to  Abraham 
by  Sarah,   is  to  show  that  polygamy  was  not  customary  with 
the  patriarchs,   it  occurred  only  under  peculiar  circumstances. 
Jacob's  family  became  numerous  in  Haran;  for  his  four  wives 
had  borne  to  him  eleven  sons   and   one  daughter,  who  were 
named  according  to  different  circumstances.     The  six  sons  of 
Leah   were    Reuben,    Simeon,    Levi,    Jehudah,    Isacchar    and 
Zebulon.      The  son  of  Rachel  was  Joseph.      The  two  sons  of 
Zilpah  were  Gad  and  Ashar.     The  two  sons  of  Bilhah  were 
Dan    and    Naphtali.     Jacob  had  only   one   daughter    by  Leah, 
whose    name  was    Dinah.     Joseph  was    the  youngest  of  his 
children,   and  he  was  born  when   the   seven  years  of  service 
were  expired,  so  that  these  twelve    children  were  born  in  a 
course   of  seven  years,  and  Reuben  was    but  six  years  older 
than  Joseph.     When  the   second  term  of  service  had  expired 
Jacob  desired  to  return  to  his  father;  but  Laban,  whose  wealth 
had  materially  increased   by  the  faithfulness   and  industry  of 
Jacob,  desired  Jacob  to  stay  with   him   and  serve  for  wages. 
Jacob  demanded,   as    his  wages,  all  the  speckled  and  spotted 
cattle,    and   all   the  brown  cattle    among  the  sheep,   and  the 
spotted  and  speckled  among  the  goats,  which  shall  be  born 
after  this  day.     Laban  consented  to   this  bargain,  and  having 
separated  from  the  herds  all  the  animals  answering  the  descrip- 
tion of  Jacob,   and  having   entrusted  them  to  the  care  of  his 
sons,  Jacob   took  again  charge    of  the    herds  of  Laban,  and 
tended  them  six  years.    Meantime,  Jacob  ingeniously  contrived 
that  all  the  animals  born,  had  the  color  described  to  be  his 
wages. 

Laban  and  his  sons  looked  jealously  upon  the  rapid  increase 


CHAPTKR    I.  21 

of  Jacob's  wealth,  and  they  were  no  longer  as  friendly  towards 
him  as  formerly.  Jacob,  observing  the  coolness  of  their  beha- 
vior, and  apprehending  the  danger  of  being  violently  dis- 
possessed of  what  he  properly  considered  his  own,  perceived 
a  divine  call — probably  his  mother  had  sent  the  promised 
messenger — to  return  into  the  land  of  his  fathers.  He  sent  for 
Rachel  and  Leah,  who  came  to  him  into  the  field,  and  after 
having  told  them  that  he  apprehended  their  father  might  rescue 
from  him  his  well-deserved  wages,  and  that  God  bid  him 
return  to  his  own  country,  they  consented  to  return  with  him 
to  his  father's  house.  When  Laban  was  absent  to  shear  his 
sheep,  Jacob,  improving  the  opportunity,  took  all  that  was  his, 
and  started  in  a  southwestern  direction  with  the  intention  to 
return  to  his  father.  Rachel  took  along,  without  the  knowledge 
of  Jacob,  the  idols  of  her  father.  Three  days  after  that,  Laban 
was  informed  of  the  flight  of  Jacob;  in  company  with  his 
friends  he  pursued  after  Jacob  and  overtook  him  after  seven 
days'  journey  on  the  mountains  of  Gilead.  Laban  and  Jacob 
had  encamped  on  two  opposite  hills,  as  two  hostile  armies. 
The  approaching  night  prevented  any  action.  At  night, 
however,  Laban  was  cautioned  by  a  divine  voice — it  was 
probably  the  paternal  love  which  arose  in  his  heart  and  over- 
came all  other  emotions — to  do  no  injury  to  Jacob.  When  the 
morning  had  dawned,  Laban  came  to  Jacob  and  rebuked  him 
that  he  fled  away  secretly,  as  he  would  have  sent  him  off 
honorably  with  song  and  music;  and  besides  this,  Laban  asked 
him  why  he  stole  his  gods  ?  Jacob  felt  offended  by  this  ques- 
tion, and  told  him  concerning  his  apprehensions  which  caused 
him  to  flee  secretly;  adding  to  this  the  permission  or  request 
to  search  in  all  his  tents  and  to  take  what  is  his,  and  whoso- 
ever has  his  gods  should  not  live.  Laban  searching  through  all 
the  tents  without  finding  his  gods,  came  also  into  the  tent  of 
Rachel,  who,  sitting  upon  the  images,  and  making  excuses  that 
she  could  not  rise,  escaped  the  reproach  of  her  father,  and 
probably  the  pain  of  death,  for  this  was  the  punishment  pro- 
nounced by  JacoV.  When  Laban  had  thus  searched  everywhere 
and  found  nothing,  Jacob  gave  utterance  to  the  feelings  of  an 


23! 


PERIOD    I, 


honest  man,  who  is  accused  of  a  crime  which  he  did  not  com- 
mit. Laban,  however,  answered  with  paternal  affection,  and 
the  quarrel  subsided;  a  covenant  of  peace  and  mutual  friendship, 
which  was  concluded  with  a  feast,  was  made  between  the 
parties,  in  witness  of  which  a  heap  of  stones  was  erected, 
which  gave  to  the  place  the  name  of  Galed  (a  heap  of  stones), 
and  Laban  returned  satisfied  to  Haran. 

Jacob  was  once  more  an  independent  sheik ;  but  he  was  no 
longer  under  the  protection  of  Laban.  He  had  now  to  care  for 
the  safety  of  his  tribe,  and  he  intended  to  cross  the  Jordan  in 
order  to  reach  his  father.  The  fear  of  his  brother  Esau 
powerfully  returned  to  his  mind.  Will  not  the  offended  brother, 
who  had  become  powerful  while  he  remained  a  simple  shep- 
herd, take  vengeance  for  the  wrongs  done  to  him?  This  was 
the  thought  which  troubled  Jacob  severely.  Twenty  years  of 
dependency,  the  love  he  felt  for  his  family,  and  probably  also 
the  consciousness  of  his  weakness,  occasioned  Jacob  to  resign 

7  CD 

his  claims  upon  the  successorship  to  the  government  among  the 
tribe  of  his  father.  Therefore  he  sent  messengers  to  his  brother 
Esau,  commanding  them,  4i  Thus  you  shall  say  to  my  lord,  to 
Esau,  thus  says  thy  servant  Jacob,  I  have  sojourned  with  Laban 
and  stayed  there  till  now.  And  I  have  oxen  and  asses,  flocks,  and 
man-servants  and  maid-servants,  and  I  have  sent  to  tell  my 
lord,  that  I  may  find  grace  in  thy  sight."  But  his  messengers 
returned  with  the  tidings  that  Esau,  accompanied  by  four  hun- 
dred men,  came  to  meet  him.  Jacob,  who  thought  that  having 
removed  the  cause  of  Esau's  hatred  he  would  be  appeased,  did 
not  know  how  to  take  that  coming  with  an  army;  he  was 
sorely  afraid  that  having  informed  Esau  of  his  weakness,  he 
would  wish  to  kill  him  and  his  family  in  order  to  obtain  a  rich 
spoil.  He  thought  of  counteracting  this  design,  first  by  dividing 
his  herds  and  men  into  two  camps,  wherefore  the  place  was 
called  Mahnaim  (double  camps),  which  would  cause  them  to 
appear  too  small  a  recompense  for  so  atrocious  a  crime,  where- 
as the  enemy  himself  must  reckon,  if  he  charge  and  overcome 
the  first  camp,  the  second  one  will  escape  by  flight.  And  the 
second  means  to  which  he  resorted  was  sending  a  large  and 


CHAPTER    I.  23 

still  larger  looking  present  to  his  brother,  bidding  his  servants 
again  to  say  words  of  a  very  submissive  nature.  But  before  he 
resorted  to  these  means,  he  prayed  to  God  in  warm  and  very  sen- 
sible terms  in  behalf  of  his  family,  not  mentioning  however  the 
promise  of  possessing  the  land  of  his  fathers,  on  account  of  the 
previous  resignation  to  this  claim.  The  same  night  Jacob  had 
transported  his  family  and  all  he  had  over  the  river  Jabbok,  and 
he  alone  remained  on  the  other  side,  when  a  man — probably 
a  froobooter — attacked  him,  but  Jacob  offered  a  violent  resist- 
ance so  that  they  wrestled  for  sometime,  until  finally  Jacob  was 
lamed  by  his  opponent.  Jacob  was  now  not  only  sorely  afraid 
on  account  of  his  approaching  brother,  but  he  was  also  lame 
and  unfit  either  to  flee  or  to  protect  his  family.  These  hours 
of  distress  were  commemorated  by  the  family  of  Israel  in  not 
eating  the  sinew  which  is  upon  the  hollow  of  the  thigh.  Jacob 
had  passed  Penuel,  when  Esau  with  his  four  hundred  men  met 
him.  Jacob  bowed  down  obediently  before  his  brother,  not 
knowing  yet  how  this  scene  would  end,  but,  contrary  to  his 
expectations,  Esau  welcomed  him  in  the  most  friendly  manner. 
"When  he  asked  Jacob  about  the  cattle  he  had  met,  and  Jacob 
told  him  it  was  a  present  intended  to  appease  him,  Esau  refused 
to  accept  it,  and  he  only  then  took  it  when  Jacob  pressed  him  to 
do  so.  Esau  invited  his  brother  to  go  with  him  to  Seir,  which 
Jacob  declined;  he  also  offered  to  Jacob  the  service  of  his  men, 
which  was  in  like  manner  declined.  Esau  and  Jacob  were  now 
reconciled.  Esau  leaving  his  father's  possessions  to  Jacob, 
returned  to  the  land  of  Edom,  and  Jacob  stopped  at  a  place 
called  afterwards  Succoth  (tents),  on  account  of  the  tents 
which  Jacob  had  pitched  there.  Remarkable  is  it  that  Jacob 
built  for  himself  a  house,  being  the  first  time  that  one  of  the 
patriarchs  had  built  a  house.  This  circumstance  confirms  the 
supposition,  that  Jacob  must  have  remained  for  a  long  time  at 
Succoth,  for  Simeon  and  Levi  can  not  have  been  older  than  ten 
or  eleven  years  when  departing  from  Nahor ;  and  boys  of  this 
age  certainly  can  not  attack  all  the  inhabitants  of  a  city,  as 
they  did  in  Shechem. 

After  Jacob  had  stayed  for  sometime  in  Succoth,  he  crossed 


24  PERIOD    I. 

the  Jordan,  probably  at  the  same  spot  where  once  Abraham 
crossed  this  river,  for  he  also  went  to  Shechem,  in  order  to 
settle  on  the  land  of  his  father.  But  when  coming  there  he 
found  the  land  occupied  by  the  Emorites,  and  being  unwilling 
to  make  war  upon  the  inhabitants,  which  would  have  been 
imprudent  as  he  had  but  few  men,  he  bought  a  piece  of  land 
where  he  pitched  his  tent,  and  as  once  his  grandsire  did,  and 
probably  on  the  same  spot,  he  erected  an  altar  and  worshiped 
God.  Although  Jacob  bought  a  piece  of  land  near  the  city  of 
Shechem,  still  not  all  the  land  which  he  claimed  in  the  name 
of  his  family  was  occupied  by  the  Emorites;  plenty  of  land  was 
left  for  his  herds,  which  he  forthwith  occupied. 

Dinah,  the  daughter  of  Jacob  and  Leah,  curious  to  see  the 
daughters  of  that  country,  had  left  her  tent;  she  was  seen  by 
Shechem,  the  son  of  Hamar,  the  prince  of  the  country,  who 
took  her  to  his  house,  seduced  her  and  kept  her  there,  which 
gave  great  offence  to  Jacob  and  his  sons.  Hamar,  induced  by 
his  son,  offered  to  Jacob  a  pacific  proposition  to  be  blended 
into  one  tribe,  which  the  sons  of  Jacob  seemingly  received,  if 
the  inhabitants  of  Shechem  be  circumcised  like  themselves. 
Hamar,  partly  induced  by  his  son,  and  partly  by  the  conscious- 
ness that  the  land  properly  belonged  to  Jacob,  and  probably 
therefore  proposed  the  marriage  of  his  son  with  the  daughter 
of  Jacob,  occasioned  his  people  to  take  this  step.  But  the 
third  day  after  the  operation,  when  none  of  the  inhabitants 
could  defend  themselves,  two  of  the  offended  brothers  of  the 
dishonored  Dinah  massacred  all  the  male  inhabitants  of  the 
place,  the  females  and  whatever  they  found  in  the  city  they 
took  as  a  spoil,  and  taking  Dinah  from  the  house  of  the  seducer 
brought  her  back  to  her  parents.  Jacob  saw  himself  now  in  a 
horrid  position;  he  could  not  well  go  back  over  the  Jordan, 
whereas  he  did  not  consider  that  land  his  own;  he  could  not 
well  proceed  south  to  reach  his  father,  whereas  he  did  not 
know  whether  Esau  will  be  satisfied,  if  he  take  possession  of 
the  land  of  his  father;  he  could  not  stay  in  this  part  of  the 
country,  whereas  he  had  to  fear  the  wrath  of  his  neighbors; 
his  two  sons  had  brought  him  in  a  position  which  he  could  not 


CHAPTER    I.  25 

well  forget  even  in  his  last  hour,  when  he  told  them,  M Cursed 
be  their  anger,  for  it  is  fierce;  and  their  wrath  for  it  is  cruel." 
But  the  moral  power  of  a  man  is  most  prominent  in  the  hour 
of  danger,  and  so  the  pious  Jacob  heard  the  divine  voice, 
advising  him  to  return  to  Beth  El,  and  remember  the  night 
when  he  fled  from  Esau  his  brother,  and  also  the  dream  he  had 
there,  and  the  vow  he  made  at  that  time.  Jacob  commanded 
his  sons  to  change  garments,  to  be  cleansed,  and  to  give  up  to 
him  the  idols  taken  in  Shechem,  which  he  hid  in  the  earth; 
and  then  they  advanced  towards  Beth  El,  where  an  altar  was 
built,  and  the  memory  of  the  eventful  night,  when  first  sleeping 
there  upon  a  pillow  of  stones,  was  celebrated.  Jacob  saw  part 
of  his  dream  verified ;  God  had  been  with  him  in  the  night 
when  Laban  had  overtaken  him ;  at  the  day  when  Esau  met 
him;  and  now  again  when  he  feared  the  wrath  of  his  neighbors. 
Here  he  was  again  rich  and  blessed  with  a  large  family.  This 
encouraged  him  to  believe  that  the  second  part  of  his  dream,  or 
rather  of  his  wishes,  will  also  be  fulfilled;  and  so  he  was  again 
expressively  told  by  the  divine  voice,  that  he  will  be  the  heir  of 
Abraham  and  Isaac;  that  Esau  shall  molest  him  no  more,  for 
his  sons  have  become  fearless  warriors.  Therefore  he  shall  no 
longer  be  called  Jacob  (one  who  holds  the  heels,  who  is  sub- 
jected to  another  one),  his  name  shall  now  be  Israel  (Yisrael, 
one  who  rules  by  God).  Thus  encouraged,  Jacob  proceeded 
now  fearlessly  towards  the  south,  after  he  had  buried  Deborah 
the  nurse  of  Rebecca,  and  after  he  had  erected  another  pillar 
called  El  Beth  El,  to  reach  the  home  of  his  father.  But  when 
on  the  way,  Rachel,  his  favorite  wife,  died  when  she  had  given 
birth  to  the  youngest  son  of  Jacob,  whom  the  dying  mother 
called  Ben  Oni  (son  of  my  affliction),  and  Jacob  called  him 
Benjamin  (Benyamin,  son  of  my  old  age).  Where  afterwards 
the  town  of  Beth  Lehem  stood,  there  the  patriarch  silently  dug 
a  grave,  returned  to  the  earth  the  fragments  of  Rachel  for 
whom  he  had  served  fourteen  years,  and  a  rude  stone,  sanctified 
by  the  tears  of  Jacob,  long  told  the  following  generations, 
"Here  rests  Rachel,  the  fair,  the  beloved."  The  weary 
patriarch  pitched  his  tent  at  Migdal  Eder;  but  here  again  grief 


tdy  PERIOD  I. 

and  sorrow  fell  into  his  cup,  for  here  he  heard  of  the  villainy 
of  his  eldest  son  Reuben  and  his  concubine  Bilhah.  Simple  and 
inexperienced  had  Jacob  left  the  solitary  tent  of  his  mother, 
but  having  passed  through  the  severest  hours  of  trial  and 
affliction,  he  returned  an  experienced  and  sanctified  man  to 
his  aged  mother  and  blind  father,  and  thought  of  passing  the 
rest  of  his  life  happily  in  the  bosom  of  his  numerous  family; 
but  otherwise  it  was  determined  in  the  counsel  of  Providence. 

Jacob  had  taken  possession  of  his  father's  property,  who  was 
at  least  160  years  old,  and  had  been  blind  for  many  years. 
Jacob  himself  was  about  100  years,  gray,  and  bent  by  a  sad 
and  joyless  life.  It  was  time  for  him  soon  to  appoint  one  of 
his  sons  as  his  successor  in  the  tribe.  Reuben,  the  firstborn, 
it  was  well  known  to  the  brothers,  had  lost  the  confidence  of 
their  father;  the  same  was  the  case  with  Simeon  and  Levi. 
So  the  brothers  supposed  Jehudah  will  be  chosen  by  their 
father,  and  it  appears  that  this  choice  would  have  pleased 
them.  But  Joseph,  who  was  the  favorite  of  his  father  on 
account  of  his  mother  Rachel,  whom  the  father  also  distin- 
guished from  the  rest  of  his  sons,  held  himself  more  on  the 
side  of  the  sons  of  Bilhah  and  Zilpah  than  with  the  sons  of 
Leah,  which  increased  their  suspicion  that  Joseph  was  anxious 
for  the  dignity  of  being  his  father's  successor.  Joseph  had  two 
dreams  which  appeared  to  indicate  that  he  really  aspired  to 
that  honor,  even  during  the  lifetime  of  the  father,  whereas  he  saw 
that  Isaac  had  done  the  same  to  Jacob.  He  was  inconsiderate 
enough — being  but  seventeen  years  old — to  tell  his  dreams  to 
his  father  in  the  presence  of  his  brothers.  Notwithstanding 
the  earnest  rebuke  of  the  father  about  his  foolish  dreams,  and 
his  expressive  declaration  that  he,  his  wife  and  his  sons  will 
not  bow  down  to  him,  the  suspicion  of  the  brothers  increased 
and  produced  a  violent  hatred  against  Joseph. 

The  sons  of  Jacob  maintained  the  possession  of  Shechem  and 
the  land,  which  they  supposed  to  be  theirs  by  the  right  of 
inheritance  and  of  conquest.  They  had  their  herds  there,  not 
fearing  the  wrath  of  other  tribes.  Jacob,  who  was  still  afraid 
the   neighboring   tribes  might  combine  against  his  sons,  sent 


CHAPTER   I.  27 

Joseph  to  Shechem  in  order  to  bring  him  word  of  his  brothers. 
Joseph,  after  wandering  about  for  sometime  in  the  then  unoccu- 
pied land  between  Mamra  and  Shechem,  iinally  found  his 
brothers  at  Dothan.  When  his  brothers  saw  him  at  a  distance, 
some  of  them  proposed  to  kill  him.  But  Reuben  proposed  not 
to  kill  him  directly,  but  to  throw  him  into  one  of  the  pits, 
where  he  would  starve  to  death — he  intended  to  save  Joseph 
and  to  bring  him  back  to  his  father.  The  brothers  agreed,  and 
when  Joseph  came  they  stripped  him  of  his  coat  of  many  colors, 
and  then  threw  him  into  the  pit.  Reuben  left  them  in  order 
to  avoid  suspicion,  and  the  brothers  sat  down  to  their  meal, 
when  a  caravan  of  Ishmaelites  and  Midianites  approached 
them*  Jehudah,  who  knew  well  that  his  words  had  influence 
with  his  brothers,  and  probably  also  observing  that  the  first 
and  most  violent  rage  of  anger  was  over,  urged  that  if  they 
should  sell  Joseph  for  a  slave,  they  would  attain  the  same 
object  of  not  being  governed  by  him,  as  if  they  were  to  kill 
him  and  cover  his  blood.  Jehudah's  words  were  respected; 
Joseph  was  brought  up  from  the  pit,  and  sold  for  twenty  pieces 
of  silver  to  the  passing  merchants,  who  took  him  along  down 
to  Egypt.  Reuben  returned,  and  almost  despaired  when  not 
finding  Joseph;  but  it  was  too  late,  and  silence  was  the  best 
policy  for  him.  Joseph's  coat  of  many  colors  was  dipped  in 
blood  and  sent  to  the  father,  who  supposed  a  ferocious  beast 
had  killed  and  devoured  his  son.  He  gave  vent  to  the  most 
violent  grief,  and  none  could  console  him. 

Jehudah  had  taken  a  wife,  the  daughter  of  a  merchant  whose 
name  was  Shua;  she  bore  unto  him  three  sons,  Er,  Onan,  and 
Shelah.  When  Er  had  grown  up  he  married  Tamar ;  but  Er 
died  childless,  and  Jehudah  bade  his  son  Onan  take  in  mar- 
riage his  sister-in-law,  "  and  raise  up  seed  to  his  brother." 
Onan  obeyed,  but  it  occurred  also  that  Onan  died  childless. 
Jehudah  told  his  daughter-in-law  to  wait  until  his  youngest 
son  had  grown  up.  She  waited  for  sometime,  but  Shelah  did 
not  take  her  in  marriage;  wherefore  she  disguised  herself  and 
sitting  by  the  wayside,  she  obtained  children  by  Jehudah. 
without  his -knowing  who  she  was.     Jehudah  was  told  that  his 


28  PERIOD    Ii 

daughter-in-law  was  pregnant,  and  he  ordered  her  to  be  burned. 
But  when  she  was  brought  out  to  be  executed,  she  sent  to 
Jehudah  the  seal,  handkerchief  and  staff  which  he  had  left  with 
her  as  a  surety.  Jehudah  remembered  his  fault,  and  said,  she  is 
innocent,  the  fault  is  his,  because  he  has  not  given  her  in 
marriage  to  his  son  Shelah,  and  accordingly  she  was  spared. 
She  gave  birth  to  twin  brothers,  who  were  called  Parez  and 
Zarah.  From  this  fragment  it  would  appear  that  Jehudah 
separated  from  his  brothers,  but  no  cause  is  mentioned  in  the 
Bible,  nor  is  it  said  when  or  why  he  returned. 

Joseph  was  brought  to  Egypt  and  was  sold  to  Potiphar,  an 
officer  of  Pharaoh,  in  whose  house  he  soon  was  found  so  useful 
and  honest,  that  his  master  made  him  the  steward  of  it,  giving 
him  unlimited  authority  in  his  house  and  fields.  The  wife  of 
his  master  fell  in  love  with  Joseph,  but  notwithstanding  her 
exertions  to  mislead  him,  Joseph  adhered  to  the  principles  of 
morality.  When  once  alone  with  Joseph,  she  was  so  over- 
ruled by  her  passions,  that  she  caught  Joseph  by  the  garment, 
who  left  a  piece  of  it  with  her,  and  escaped.  The  passionate 
love  of  the  woman  being  thus  disappointed,  turned  into  a 
furious  hatred;  she  accused  the  innocent  lad  of  having  at- 
tempted to  seduce  her,  which  deprived  Joseph  of  his  liberty. 
He  was  thrown  into  prison,  but  even  there  he  found  favor  in 
the  sight  of  the  chief  jailer,  who  appointed  him  overseer  to 
the  other  prisoners.  The  chief  butler  and  the  chief  baker 
of  the  king  of  Egypt,  had  committed  a  transgression  against 
their  lord,  wherefore  they  were  kept  in  the  prison  where 
Joseph  was,  until  investigation  should  be  made  into  their 
respective  cases.  Joseph  was  ordered  to  minister  to  them. 
One  day  he  found  them  unusually  disheartened  and  downcast ; 
when  asking  them  the  reason,  he  was  told  that  a  dream  which 
each  of  them  had,  was  the  cause  of  their  being  downcast. 
Joseph  interpreted  their  dreams,  according  to  which  the  chief 
butler  was  to  be  restored  to  his  office  after  three  days,  and  the 
chief  baker  was  to  be  hung  after  three  days.  Joseph  entreated 
the  chief  butler  to  intercede  for  him  with  Pharaoh,  as  he  is 
innocent.     The  fate  of  the  two  officers  was  precisely  as  pre- 


CHAPTER    I.  29 

dieted  to  them  by  Joseph ;  but  the  chief  butler  forgot  his 
request.  Two  years  after  this,  Pharaoh  had  a  dream,  which 
none  of  his  magicians  and  wise  men,  who  had  elevated  the 
interpretation  of  dreams  almost  to  a  science,  could  interpret. 
The  chief  butler  spoke  to  Pharaoh  of  the  Hebrew  lad,  who 
had  interpreted  his  and  his  fellow-prisoner's  dreams  so  agree- 
bly  to  truth  that  it  literally  occurred  as  he  had  predicted, 
Joseph  was  released  from  his  prison  and  brought  before  Pha- 
raoh. The  dream  was  narrated  and  he  interpreted  that  seven 
years  of  plenteousness  will  come,  which  will  be  followed  by 
seven  years  of  extreme  sterility ;  wherefore  he  advised  Pharaoh 
to  appoint  officers  for  the  purpose  of  storing  corn  during  the 
seven  years  of  plenteousness,  in  order  that  the  country  be 
supported  during  the  following  years  of  sterility.  Pharaoh 
was  so  surprised  by  the  wisdom  and  meekness  of  Joseph,  who 
was  then  thirty  years  old,  that  he  elevated  him  to  the  dignity 
of  viceroy,  and  gave  him  full  powers  to  store  provisions 
throughout  the  whole  country,  and  sell  them  afterwards 
according  to  his  own  judgment.  Pharaoh  called  Joseph 
Zaphnath  Phaneah  (savior  of  the  commonwealth),  and  gave 
him  in  marriage  A  snath,  the  daughter  of  Poti  Phera,  priest  of 
On  (the  chief  deity  of  the  Egyptians),  by  whom  Joseph  begot 
two  sons,  Menassah  and  Ephraim. 

Joseph  bought  and  stored  provisions  in  all  parts  of  Egypt 
during  the  seven  years  of  plenteousness.  And  when  the  years 
of  sterility  commenced,  the  people  came  to  Pharaoh  to  buy 
corn ;  but  he  sent  them  to  Joseph  who  had  chief  authority  in 
this  respect.  There  was  famine  in  many  neighboring  countries, 
but  in  Egypt  was  bread. 

The  sterility  of  Egypt  had  also  brought  famine  into  the  land 
of  Canaan.  Jacob  advised  his  sons  to  go  to  Egypt  and  buy 
corn.  The  sons  of  Jacob,  with  the  exception  of  Benjamin, 
arrived  in  Egypt  and  bowed  down  to  Joseph,  whom  they  did 
not  know  in  his  dress  of  an  Egyptian  dignitary.  Joseph  knew 
them,  and  wishing  to  convince  himself  whether  they  had 
repented  of  the  wickedness  committed  on  him,  he  treated  them 
with   an   unusual   degree  of  harshness,  telling  them  that  he 


30  PERIOD    I. 

considers  them  spies,  who  came  to  ascertain  the  weakness  of 
the  country.  The  brothers  in  vain  endeavored  to  prove  that 
they  were  the  sons  of  one  father,  which  is  not  likely  that  ten 
sons  of  one  father  would  embark  in  such  a  dangerous  concern ;  he 
insisted  in  his  accusation  and  sent  them  to  prison,  where  he  left 
them  for  three  days ;  after  which  they  again  appeared  before  him, 
and  he  told  them  that  he  will  only  then  believe  their  state- 
ment, if  he  is  convinced  that  they  are  the  sons  of  one  man; 
which  to  prove,  one  of  them  must  remain  in  his  power,  and 
the  others  may  return  and  bring  their  youngest  brother  of  whom 
they  spoke.  The  brothers  of  Joseph,  who  did  not  know  that  he 
understood  their  language,  for  he  spoke  to  them  by  an  inter- 
preter, said  to  each  other,  "Verily,  we  are  guilty  concerning 
our  brother,  in  that  we  saw  the  anguish  of  his  soul  when  he 
besought  us  and  we  would  not  hear,  therefore  is  this  distress 
come  upon  us."  Joseph  had  now  heard  that  his  brothers  re- 
pented; he  turned  from  them  and  wept.  Whether  these  were 
tears  of  joy  that  his  brothers  had  improved  their  moral  cha- 
racter, or  a  painful  recollection  of  the  past,  or  pity  for  the  grief 
of  his  brothers,  we  can  not  say;  but  Joseph  returned  to  them 
composedly,  and  took  Simeon  from  them,  binding  him  in  their 
presence,  after  which  he  gave  orders  to  send  them  away.  He 
took  Simeon  from  them,  because,  as  an  ancient  commentator 
states,  Simeon  was  his  principal  opponent,  and  he  was  afraid 
the  brothers  might  do  him  harm  on  the  way.  When  on  the 
road,  one  of  the  brothers  of  Joseph  found  his  money  given 
back  unto  him,  and  so  the  others  did  when  coming  home, 
which  increased  their  fear  to  the  utmost  They  informed  their 
father  of  the  treatment  they  received  in  Egypt,  and  told  him 
that  they  could  not  return  to  Egypt  unless  Benjamin  is  sent 
with  them,  to  which  Jacob  objected.  Reuben,  however,  was 
foolish  enough  to  say  to  his  father,  that  he  should  entrust 
Benjamin  to  his  hands,  and  if  he  should  not  bring  him  back, 
Jacob  may  kill  the  two  sons  of  Reuben,  his  own  grandchildren. 
Jacob  did  not  answer  to  this  folly,  but  insisted  upon  not  send- 
ing his   youngest  son  with  them.     Jehudah,  the  prudent  and 


CHAPTER   I.  31 

just,  who  waited  to  plead  for  his  brother  Joseph,  when  his 
brothers  had  resolved  to  starve  him  to  death,  until  the  first 
rage  of  anger  was  over,  did  so  now.  When  the  provisions 
were  consumed,  he  told  his  father  that  they  could  not  go  to 
Egypt  unless  Benjamin  could  go  with  them;  bnt  he  also  told 
his  father  to  entrust  the  lad  into  his  hands  upon  his  word  of 
honor.  This  had  more  influence  on  Jacob  than  the  address 
of  Reuben,  and  he  entrusted  the  lad  into  the  hands  of  Jelmdah, 
recommending  to  them  great  caution — taking  along  presents 
and  money — then  he  prayed:  "And  the  Almighty  God  will 
give  you  mercy  before  the  man,  and  he  will  send  with  you 
your  other  brother  and  Benjamin;"  and  then  he  resigned  his 
fate  in  the  hands  of  Providence. 

The  eleven  sons  of  Jacob  went  down  again  to  Egypt  well 
provided  with  money,  delicious  fruits  and  spices,  which  the 
land  of  Canaan  produced.  Arrived  at  the  place  where  Joseph 
resided,  they  were  guided  into  the  house  of  Joseph,  who  had 
ordered  dinner  to  be  prepared  for  them,  but  which  greatly 
increased  their  fear.  They  were  greatly  surprised  when  they 
were  richly  entertained,  and  Joseph  had  ascertained  the  age  of 
each  of  them  by  the  magic  power  of  his  cup.  In  the  morning 
they  were  dismissed  in  a  friendly  manner ;  but  the  magic  cup 
of  Joseph  was  put  into  the  sack  of  Benjamin.  This  was  the 
last  trial  which  Joseph  undertook  with  his  brothers.  He  well 
knew  that  Benjamin  must  now  be  to  his  father  what  he  was  to 
him  formerly;  consequently  the  jealousy  of  his  brothers  must 
now  be  the  same  towards  Benjamin  as  it  was  formerly  against 
him.  He  knew  that  his  brothers  repented  what  they  had  done 
to  him,  and  they  would  not  do  the  same  to  Benjamin.  But  he 
offered  to  them  a  chance  to  dispose  of  Benjamin  without  the 
least  cooperation  on  their  sides,  so  that  they  were  perfectly 
innocent.  When,  therefore,  the  brothers  had  left  the  city, 
Joseph  sent  after  them  an  officer  of  his  house,  to  bring  back 
the  one  who  had  the  cup,  to  be  Joseph's  slave.  But  when  the 
officer  had  overtaken  them,  and  had  found  the  cup  in  the  sack 
of  Benjamin,  they  did  not  suffer  Benjamin  to  return  alone  to 
the    city;   all  of  them  returned  mournfully  with  him.     Being 


32  CHAPTER   I. 

brought  before  Joseph  all  of  them  fell  down  upon  their  faces 
in  silent  grief;  none  of  them  could  speak.  Jehudah  could 
scarcely  say  anything,  but  that  all  of  them  are  now  his  slaves- 
Joseph,  however,  insisted  that  only  the  one  with  whom  the 
cup  was  found  is  to  be  his  slave,  the  others  may  return  in 
peace  to  their  father.  This  common  grief  of  the  brothers  con- 
vinced Joseph  that  they  really  repented  of  their  iniquity 
towards  him.  Meanwhile,  Jehudah  had  composed  himself,  and 
he  addressed  to  Joseph  words  in  which  boldness  and  sensibility 
vie  with  each  other;  it  is  the  elocution  of  a  lion-hearted  man. 
who  is  overpowered  by  the  grief  of  his  aged  father.  He 
reviewed  the  whole  story  in  brief  words;  he  represented  to 
Joseph  the  grief  of  his  father  when  departing  from  his  youngest 
son;  he  then  depicted  the  grief  of  his  father,  if  Benjamin 
should  not  return;  and  finally  he  told  Joseph,  that  he,  having 
given  his  word  of  honor,  can  not  possibly  return,  and  see  him- 
self dishonored  in  every  tear  and  every  sigh  of  his  unfortunate 
father;  wherefore  he  proposed  to  be  a  slave  unto  Joseph,  only 
to  let  Benjamin  return  to  his  parent.  Joseph  was  overpowered, 
and  bursting  into  tears  he  told  them,  "  I  am  Joseph,  lives  my 
father  yet?"  The  surprise  of  the  brothers  was  great,  but  he 
encouraged  them  with  fraternal  words,  and  bade  them  return  to 
their  father  and  tell  him  of  his  son's  glory  in  Egypt,  and  bring 
him  and  his  family  there  to  live  happily  the  rest  of  his  days. 
Pharaoh  also  who  had  heard  of  the  arrival  of  Joseph's  brothers, 
bade  them  take  animals,  wagons  and  provisions,  to  return  to 
Canaan,  and  to  come  down  with  their  father  and  the  whole  of 
his  family.  They  did  so,  and  when  returning  to  Jacob  his 
mind  revived  at  the  glorious  tidings.  Jacob  left  Mamra,  for 
Isaac  had  died  ten  years  previous  to  Jacob's  departure,  at  the 
age  of  180  years,  and  was  buried  by  Jacob  and  Esau  in  the 
cave  of  Machpelah,  and  when  he  came  to  Bear  Shaba,  where  he 
had  passed  the  happy  days  of  his  youth,  he  offered  sacrifices  to 
the  God  of  his  father  Isaac.  But  here  the  mission  of  his  tribe 
came  in  conflict  with  the  paternal  feelings  to  see  his  son 
Joseph  before  he  dies ;  the  former  made  it  his  duty  to  stay  in 
Canaan,  as  his  father  Isaac  had  done,  when  famine  was  in  the 


CHAPTER    I.  33 

land,  and  the  latter  stimulated  him  to  go  to  Egypt;  but  the 
latter  triumphed,  and  at  night,  when  this  struggle  may  have 
driven  the  slumber  from  his  eyelids,  he  heard  the  divine  voice 
encouraging  him  to  go  down  into  Egypt,  where  he  will  become 
a  great  nation.  "  I  will  go  down  with  thee  to  Egypt,  I  will 
also  bring  thee  up  again  and  Joseph  shall  put  his  hands  on 
thine  eyes,"  Jacob  and  his  family,  sixty-six  persons,  besides  the 
wives  of  his  sons,  the  wife  and  sons  of  Joseph,  the  husbands  and 
children  of  his  daughters,  and  undoubtedly  a  great  number  of 
servants  {Gen.,  xlvi,  7),  crossed  the  Isthmus  of  Suez,  andrcached 
the  province  of  Goshen,  where  he  was  welcomed  by  his  son,  who, 
on  being  notified  by  Jehudah  of  the  arrival  of  his  father,  had 
come  up  from  Memphis,  which,  it  appears,  was  the  residence 
of  the  Pharaoh,  of  Lower  Egypt.  Although  Joseph  married  a 
daughter  of  a  priest  of  Heliopolis,  and  was  himself  a  member 
of  this  learned  order  of  priests,  who  changed  his  name  into 
Osarsiph,  still  it  appears  from  the  biblical  record,  that  he 
resided  in  Memphis,  that  being  the  seat  of  government.  It 
appears  to  have  been  the  wish  of  Jacob  to  remain  in  the 
province  of  Goshen,  not  only  because  this  was  a  well- watered 
and  little-occupied  country,  and  because  the  Egyptians  were 
religiously  prejudiced  against  shepherds;  but  chiefly  on  account 
of  being  near  the  frontiers  of  Canaan,  which  enabled  the  tribe 
to  maintain  its  possessions  in  that  country.  Joseph  therefore 
when  acquainting  Pharaoh  with  the  arrival  of  his  tribe  and 
introducing  to  the  king  five  of  his  brothers,  did  not  tell 
him  that  they  were  husbandmen;  he  merely  stated  that  they 
were  keepers  of  sheep;  and  whereas  they  could  not  find  suffi- 
cient of  pasture  in  Canaan  they  wished  to  stay  for  a  time  in 
the  well-watered  plains  of  Goshen  until  the  famine  was  over 
Pharaoh  received  them  kindly,  and  directed  Joseph  to  give 
them  the  best  part  of  the  land  of  Goshen.     So  Joseph  gave 

Goshen,  in  the  district  afterwards  called  Raamses,  where  ho 
provided  them  with  all  that  was  necessary  for  their  support. 
He  also  introduced  his  father  to  Pharaoh,  in  which  interview 
the  statement  of  the  aged  Jacob  is  interesting  to  the  historian : 
3 


34  PERIOD   I. 

"And  Jacob  said  unto  Pharaoh,  the  days  of  the  years  of  my 
pilgrimage  are  an  hundred  and  thirty  years ;  few  and  evil  have 
been  the  days  of  the  years  of  my  life,  and  I  have  not  attained 
the  days  of  the  years  of  the  life  of  my  fathers  in  the  days  of 
their  pilgrimage."  (1695  b.  c.) 

The  famine  increased  in  Egypt  and  Caanan,  with  every  year 
of  sterility;  the  money  of  those  two  countries  was  brought  for 
food  into  the  treasury  of  Pharaoh;  the  cattle  too  was  sold  to 
the  king  for  provisions;  but  the  years  of  sterility  and  scarcity 
still  heavily  lasted  upon  the  suffering  people.  They  sold  their 
estates  and  finally  their  persons  to  the  king  to  escape  starva- 
tion. 

Joseph,  in  order  to  guard  the  country  against  similar  calami- 
ties, caused  the  agriculturists  to  live  together  in  towns,  in 
order  to  improve  civilization,  the  best  guard  against  famine, 
and  ordered  that  the  fifth  part  of  the  productions  of  the  soil 
should  be  delivered  to  Pharaoh,  to  be  preserved  in  the  royal 
storehouses,  as  the  means  of  protecting  the  country  against 
similar  afflictions  which,  however,  gave  to  the  king  despotic 
prerogatives.  Still  the  people  were  well  satisfied  with  that 
reorganization  of  the  royal  government  from  which  the  priests 
were  exempted,  who  lived  in  cities  and  received  their  salary 
from  the  king  in  provisions,  and  consequently  neither  sold 
their  estates  nor  their  persons  to  the  king. 

Joseph  saved  and  improved  Egypt,  therefore,  his  name  gave 
birth  to  many  fables  and  legends  among  the  Egyptians.  They 
called  the  pyramids  "storehouses  of  Joseph;*'  many  wells 
were  digged  and  many  dams  and  canals  were  built  by  him,  and 
also  the  exsiccation  of  the  Delta  was  ascribed  to  him.  Manetho 
confounded  the  name  of  Joseph  with  that  of  Moses.  His 
Osirsiph  literally  signifies  Joseph;  if  it  be  granted,  that  the 
term  Joseph  is  contracted  of  Yah  and  yoseph;  if  we  adopt  for 
Yah,  the  Hebrew  term  denoting  God,  the  Egyptian  term 
Osiris,  the  priests  of  Egypt,  of  w^iom  Manetho  copied,  must 
have  called  Joseph  Osirseph.  To  this  comes  yet  the  peculiar 
circumstance,  that  Manetho  calls  Osirseph  a  priest  of  Helio- 
polis,  and  that  Joseph  had  taken  in  marriage  the  daughter  of  a 


CHAPTER   I.  35 

priest  of  On  or  Helios  identical  with  Osiris,  and  as  an  officer  of 
so  high  a  rank,  necessarily  must  have  belonged  to  some  one 
clerical  order.  lie  also  called  Joseph  Salatis,  as  he  might  have 
been  named  in  the  records  of  another  temple  according  to  the 
very  letter  of  the  Bible.  "And  Joseph  was  the  Shalit" 
(Genesis  xlii,  6).  The  Coran  narrates  the  story  of  Joseph 
differently  from  the  biblical  account;  and  the  Moslems  have 
books  containing  the  supposed  loves  of  Joseph  and  Zuleikah, 
the  wife  of  Potiphar,  who,  they  allege,  was  the  daughter  of 
Pharaoh.  Some  learned  men  have  contended  that  the  Egyptians 
worshiped  Joseph  as  Osiris.  Apis  and  Serapis,  and  also  under 
the  names  of  the  second  Hermes,  Tammuz  and  Adonis. 

Jacob  lived  seventeen  years  in  Egypt;  he  saw  his  family 
rapidly  increase  in  number  and  wealth,  and  being  near  his  son 
Joseph  he  did  not  urge  his  sons  to  return  to  Canaan,  passing 
the  evening  of  his  eventful  life  in  the  midst  of  his  nourishing 
descendants.  When  the  moment  of  death  approached,  he  con- 
voked his  twelve  sons,  and  after  having  been  promised  by 
Joseph,  that  his  body  should  be  interred  by  the  side  of  his  pro- 
genitors at  Hebron,  he  ordered  the  affairs  of  his  family, 
conferring  upon  each  of  his  sons,  also  upon  the  sons  of  the 
handmaids,  the  dignity  of  an  independent  sheik,  or  head  of  a 
tribe,  to  each  of  whom  he  assigned  a  certain  portion  of  the 
land  of  Canaan,  and  appointed  one  common  chief  for  all  of 
them,  to  be  the  leader  of  the  whole  family.  This  t  dignity,  as 
well  as  a  double  portion  of  the  inheritance,  was  due  to  Reuben 
his  first-born  son,  according  to  ancient  custom;  but  this  son 
was  "  hasty  as  water;"  he  stood  accused  of  having  defiled  the 
bed  of  his  father;  consequently  the  right  of  a  double  portion  of 
the  inheritance  was  conferred  upon  Joseph,  so  that  his  two 
sons,  Menasha  and  Ephraim  were  given  equal  claims  on  the 
land  with  the  sons  of  Jacob,  which,  however,  was  only  then 
a  double  portion,  as  Jacob  intended  it  to  be,  if  the  land  had 
been  equally  divided  among  the  tribes,  and  not  according  to  the 
number  of  persons  as  was  really  done  afterwards.  Jacob  could 
not  confer  that  superior  dignity  upon  Simeon  or  Levi,  who 
were  next  in  age  to  Reuben,   because  they  were  violent  and 


36  PERIOD   I. 

fierce  men,  therefore  lie  did  not  even  confer  upon  them  the 
dignity  of  being  independent  sheiks,  distributing  their  descend- 
ants among  the  other  tribes.  Ke  next  came  to  the  lion-like 
Jehudah,  before  whom  the  sons  of  his  father  should  bow  down; 
he  conferred  upon  him  the  dignity  of  being  the  head  of  the 
family,  nearly  in  the  same  terms  as  he  once  received  that 
dignity  from  the  hands  of  his  father  (Genesis,  xxvii,  28,  29). 
After  having  expressed  his  confidence  that  Jehudah,  like  the 
young  lion  going  out  for  prey,  should  advance  at  the  head  of 
his  brothers,  and  take  possession  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  which 
he  considered  his  own,  he  said  to  his  sons,  "No  tribe  shall  depart 
from  Jehudah,  nor  shall  the  commander  depart  from  between 
his  feet  [men],  until  he  shall  have  come  to  Shiloh  [the  capital 
of  Canaan],  and  the  nations  [of  Canaan,]  shall  have  submitted 
to  him"  (Genesis,  xlix,  10),  limiting  his  supremacy  to  such  a 
period  of  time  as  might  be  necessary  to  regain  possession  of 
the  land.  After  having  thus  ordered  the  government  of  his 
family,  he  blessed  each  of  his  sons  agreeably  to  their  capacities 
and  inclinations,  and  also  according  to  the  nature  of  the  tract 
of  land  assigned  to  each  of  them,*  and  died  at  an  age  of  147 
years  (1678  b.  ,c). 

"Father  Jacob  did  not  die,"  the  ancient  sages  said;  his 
spirit  was  impressed  upon  his  numerous  family,,  his  piety  ani- 
mated the  hearts  of  his  sons ;  his  institutions  lasted  for  a  long 
period  of  time^  and  his  memory  is  still  blessed  by  the  pious 
and  good  of  all  nations.  The  body  of  the  patriarch  was  care- 
fully embalmed  by  the  physicians  of  Joseph  during  forty  days, 
which  were  followed  by  seventy  days  of  public  mourning,  all 
of  which  was  done  exactly  in  the  style  of  the  ancient  Egypt- 
ians.! Joseph,  by  special  permission  of  Pharaoh,  together 
with  the  male  descendants  of  Jacob  and  a  large  number  of 
Egyptians,  chariots  and  horses,  as  due  to  an  Egyptian 
dignitary  of  high  rank,  conveyed  the  body  of  Jacob  to  Canaan; 
and  after  mourning  seven  days,  according  to  the  customs  of  the 
Hebrews,  he  was  interred  in  the  family  sepulchre  at  Hebron. 

*  Herder  Briefe,  das  Studium  der  Theologie  betreffend  5  Brief,  v. 
f  Herod.  Lib.  ii,  cap.  85,  86;  Diodor.  Biblioth,  Lib.  i,  p,  58. 


CHAPTER  J.  tf 

Having  returned  to  Egypt,  the  brothers  of  Joseph  apprehended 

his  just  retaliation,  and  therefore  besought  him  in  the  name  of 
his  father  to  pardon  them.  If  any  thing  more  was  necessary 
to  characterize  Joseph  as  one  of  the  noblest  of  the  human 
race,  it  was  his  affectionate  answer  to  his  brothers;  he  not 
only  pardoned  them  and  attempted  to  persuade  them  that 
they  had  committed  no  wrong;  but  he  even  looked  upon  their 
grievous  crime,  of  having  sold  him,  as  the  cause  of  his  fortune, 
their  preservation,  and  the  salvation  of  Egypt.  Joseph  was, 
so  to  say,  the  moral  result  of  the  patriarchal  virtues,  as  they 
were  developed  in  the  tribe  of  Abraham ;  he  was  an  affectionate 
son,  a  kind  brother,  a  faithful  servant,  a  moral  and  pious  man, 
a  wise  governor,  and  a  devout  minister  to  Pharaoh.  He  died 
at  the  age  of  110  years,  fifty-four  years  after  the  death  of  his 
father  (1624  b.  c),  after  having  educated  Machir  his  grandson. 
He  was  embalmed  and  deposited  in  a  coffin  to  be  removed  to 
Palestine,  when  his  family  shall  return,  as  he  had  caused  them 
to  promise  under  oath. 

THE  TITLE  OF  THE  ISRAELITES  TO  THE  LAND 

OF  CANAAN. 
Before  we  conclude  this  chapter,  it  is  necessary  to  a  better 
understanding  of  history  to  drop  some  remarks  on  the  title  of 
the  Israelites  to  the  land,  which  they  afterwards  claimed  as 
theirs.  This  point  especially  deserves  our  notice,  whereas  a  great 
deal  of  ingenuity  and  learning  has  been  wasted  to  establish  the 
fact,  that  the  Israelites  had  no  legal  claim  on  Palestine,  and 
that  their  invasion  and  conquest  of  Canaan  was  an  act  of 
robbery.  Considering  the  following  passages,  we  will  be 
convinced,  that  the  patriarchs  had  undisturbed  possession  of 
the  land  of  Canaan  for  the  space  of  two  hundred  and  fifteen 
years.  God  said  to  Abraham,  "  To  thy  seed  I  will  give  this 
land;  "  in  consequence  of  which  Abraham  took  possession  of 
the  land,  erected  an  altar  as  a  mark  of  possession,  and  actually 
occupied  it  (Genesis  xii,  7-13).  After  this,  God  tells  Abraham 
that  he  will  give  the  whole  land  unto  him  and  unto  his  seed, 
upon   which  Abraham   traveled  through   the   land,   and  again 


38  PERIOD    I. 

built  an  altar  as  a  token  of  occupation  (Genesis  xiii,  14-18). 
Next  we  are  informed,  that  God  told  Abraham,  "  I  am  the 
Lord  who  brought  thee  out  of  Ur  of  the  Chaldees,  to  give  to 
thee  this  land  to  possess  it  "  (ibid  xv,  8).  "  And  I  have  given 
unto  thee  and  to  thy  seed  after  thee,  the  land  in  which  thou 
soj  our  nest,  the  whole  land  of  Canaan  for  an  eternal  possession" 
(ibid  xvii,  8).  These  passages  plainly  inform  us,  that  the  land 
was  given  to  Abraham  to  be  inherited  by  his  descendants ;  that 
he  actually  took  possession  of  it  and  occupied  it,  and  that  none 
contested  his  claims.  The  same  is  the  case  with  Isaac,  to 
whom  God  said,  "Abide  in  this  land  and  I  will  be  with  thee; 
for  to  thee  and  to  thy  seed  I  will  give  all  these  lands"*  (ibid 
xxvi,  3,  4).  He  occupied  the  land  of  his  father  considering 
himself  the  legal  heir  of  it,  and  the  only  contest  we  meet  is  in 
Phelistia,  but  everywhere  else  he  was  in  uninterrupted  possession 
of  the  land;  wherefore  he  said  to  Jacob,  his  son,  "And  he 
will  give  to  thee  the  blessing  (possession)  of  Abraham,  to  thee 
and  to  thy  seed  with  thee,  to  possess  the  land  in  which  thou 
sojournest,  which  God  has  given  to  Abraham''  (ibid  xviii,  4). 
The  same  idea  is  expressed  in  the  dream  of  Jacob.  "  The  land 
upon  which  thou  layest  I  will  give  to  thee  and  to  thy  seed  " 
(ibid  xviii,  13);  and  when  he  had  returned  to  Canaan,  "And 
the  land  which  I  have  given  to  Abraham  and  Isaac,  I  shall 
give  to  thee,  and  to  thy  seed  I  shall  give  the  land"  (ibid  xxxv, 
12).  Jacob  actually  occupied  the  land  as  the  legitimate  heir 
of  Isaac,  and  in  this  capacity  he  divided  it  among  his  sons 
(ibid  xlix).  It  was  occupied  not  merely  for  pastoral  purposes ; 
there  are  distinct  traces  of  agricultural  employment  in  the 
express  statement  about  Isaac  when  in  Phelistia  (ibid  xxvi,  12); 
in  the  blessing  which  Isaac  conferred  upon  Jacob  (ibid  xxvii, 
28,  37);  in  the  dream  of  Joseph  (ibid  xxxvii,  7),  and  in  Jacob's 
last  words.  But,  besides  this,  the  passages  quoted  before,  the 
altars  built,  the  wells  digged,  and  the  grove  planted,  would  be 
sufficient  to  entitle  us  to  the  assertion,  that  the  patriarchs 
were  in  an  uninterrupted   and  uncontested  possession   of  the 

*  To  the  Euphrates,  vide  Genesis  xv,  1S-2L 


CHAPTER    I.  39 

land  of  Canaan  for  the  space  of  two  hundred  and  fifteen  years; 
consequently,  it  was  no  longer  a  merely  promised  land,  but  it 
was  the  property  of  the  patriarchs,  according  to  all  laws  of 
natural  justice.  The  objections  which  might  be  made  against 
the  assertion,  are,  that  the  Bible  recognizes  other  nations  to 
have  existed  in  Canaan  simultaneously  with  the  patriarchs,  and 
that  they  had,  at  least,  the  same  claim  upon  the  soil  as 
the  patriarchs.  We  admit  this,  and  we  have  stated  before, 
that  they  only  took  possession  of  such  tracts  of  land  which 
had  not  previously  been  occupied;  and  the  fact,  that  this  was 
the  most  fertile  and  most  beautiful  part  of  the  country,  is  no 
mean  evidence  to  the  effect,  that  the  aborigines  must  have  been 
but  very  few  in  number.  This  hypothesis  is  powerfully  sup- 
ported by  the  facts,  that  Abraham  with  three  hundred  and 
eighteen  warriors  routed  the  army  of  Kedarleomer  and  his 
allies,  who  had  conquered  eleven  nations  in  the  south  and 
southeast  of  Palestine;  that  Abimelech  made  a  treaty  with 
the  patriarch,  in  which  it  was  stipulated,  that  they  should  do 
no  harm  to  him  and  his  descendants,  and  that  he  said  to  Isaac, 
44  Thou  art  much  too  mighty  for  us;"  that  Shechem  said  of 
Jacob  and  his  few  men,  who  was  afraid  of  Laban  and  Esau, 
"  These  men  are  peaceably  disposed  to  us;"  and  that  the  whole 
population  underwent  the  pain  of  circumcision,  that  the  family 
of  Jacob  might  amalgamate  with  them;  that  two  sons  of  Jacob 
could  massacre  all  the  males  of  the  city,  and  the  aborigines 
of  Canaan  had  not  the  boldness  to  avenge  the  wrong;  and  that 
Joseph  in  wandering  between  Hebron  and  Shechem  lost  his 
way,  where,  as  it  seems,  no  settlement  existed.  The  few 
aboriginal  tribes,  to  all  of  whom  the  patriarchs,  it  appears, 
were  superior  in  wealth  and  numerical  strength,  as  well  as  in 
the  possession  of  land,  acknowledged  the  supremacy  of  the 
tribe  of  Abraham.  This  fact  is  stated  directly  by  Nicolaus, 
of  Damascus,  quoted  by  Josephus,  as  we  have  stated  above, 
and  by  the  sons  of  Heth.  "A  prince  of  the  Lord  art  thou 
amongst  us."  It  is  no  less  plainly  mentioned  in  the  alliance 
of  Abraham  with  Aner,  Eshcol  and  Mamre  (Genesis  xiv.  13,  14): 
in  the  treaty  of  Isaac  and  Abimelech  (ibid  xxvi,  26-29).  and  in 


40  PERIOD    I. 

the  blessing  of  Isaac:  "  The  nations  will  serve  thee,  and  the 
tribes  bow  down  unto  thee."  Isaac  could  not  have  conferred  a 
dignity  upon  his  intended  successor  which  he  himself  did  not 
possess. 

It  is  therefore  evident,  that  the  partriarchs  were  the  lords  of 
Canaan,  partly  by  possessing  the  best  part  of  the  land,  partly 
by  their  superiority  in  numerical  strength,  and  partly  by  the 
acknowledgment  of  their  supremacy  by  the  aborigines;  the 
words,  "  The  land  which  I  have  given  to  Abraham  and  Isaac," 
must  be  taken  literally. 

This  supremacy  was  not  achieved  with  the  force  of  the 
sword;  for  if  so  it  would  be  mentioned  in  our  sources  as  well 
as  the  expedition  of  Abraham  against  Kedarleomer,  and  the 
massacre  of  Shechem  by  the  sons  of  Jacob.  Abraham  came 
to  Canaan  that  the  nations  of  the  earth  should  be  blessed  by 
him,  and  it  was  the  power  of  suasion,  of  truth,  of  piety, — then 
religion  was  the  mainspring  of  all  human  actions — and  true 
wisdom,  by  which  that  supremacy  was  gained  and  maintained. 
The  altars  built  by  the  patriarchs,  the  praise  bestowed  upon 
Abraham  by  Malkizedek,  king  of  Salem,  the  terms  "  Thou 
art  a  prince  of  the  Lord  among  us,"  and  the  whole  tenor  of 
our  sources  are  indicative  to  the  same  effect. 

The  next  objections  we  have  to  refute  are  these:  Jacob  in 
his  last  words,  and  especially  those  to  Jehudah,  spoke  of  taking- 
Canaan  by  war,  this  is  too  plain  to  be  denied;  which  would 
inform  us  of  the  unamicable  feelings  of  the  aborigines  towards  the 
tribe  of  Abraham,  at  least  against  Jacob.  To  this  comes  the 
fact,  that  the  possession  of  the  land  was  interrupted  by  their 
stay  in  Egypt,  consequently  they  forfeited  their  claims  on  the 
land.  We  can  not  discuss  this  question  before  we  have  proceeded 
farther  in  our  history ;  we  will  then  show,  that  during  the  ab- 
sence of  Jacob  other  nations  overran  and  subjected  the  country, 
forcibly  preventing  the  Israelites  from  retaking  the  land  which 
was  theirs  by  divine  and  by  natural  justice;  by  divine  pro- 
mise, actual,  uninterrupted  and  uncontested  occupation  by  the 
fathers. 


CHAPTER    II.  41 


CHAPTER  11. 

THE  ISRAELITES  IN  EGYPT.     THE  EXODE.     (1695-1485,  B.  C.jf- 

After  we  are  informed,  at  the  end  of  Genesis,  that  Jacob 
and  Joseph  died,  and  again  at  the  beginning  of  Exodus,  that 
Joseph  and  that  whole  generation  died;  our  sources  continue 
that  the  children  of  Israel  were  fruitful,  increased  in  number 
and  strength,  and  "  There  arose  up  a  new  king  over  Egypt  who 
knew  not  Joseph,"  and  they  were  miserably  enslaved.  From 
the  time  when  Jacob  came  to  Egypt  to  the  death  of  Joseph  was 
about  seventy  years ;  Levi  lived  twenty-three  years  after  Joseph* 
not  having  been  more  than  four  years  older  than  the  former, 
(Exodus  vi,  16),  consequently  there  is  a  period  of  about  ninety 
years  of  peace  and  prosperity,  of  which  we  know  no  more  than 
that  "  the  children  of  Israel  were  fruitful  and  increased  abund- 
antly, and  multiplied  and  waxed  exceedingly  mighty;  and  the 
land  was  filled  with  them,"  so  that  the  new  king  of  Egypt  who 
knew  not  Joseph,  could  say,  "  Behold,  the  children  of  Israel 
are  more  numerous  and  mightier  than  we." 

Besides  this,  the  Bible  contains  a  few  particulars  in  reference 
to  that  time;  we  learn  (Genesis  1)  that  the  Israelites  were 
received  in  Egypt  as  the  family  of  their  benefactor,  were  given 
the  province  of  Raamses,  called  so  by  anticipation,  in  the  most 
fertile  district  of  Goshen  between  the  ancient  Pelusaic  branch 
of  the  Nile,  the  Isthmus  of  Suez  and  the  mountains  of  Attaka; 
and  that  they  after  the  lapse  of  seventeen  years  were  so 
naturalized  in  Egypt,  that  when  returning  to  Canaan  to  bury 
Jacob,  they  were  considered  to  be  Egyptians.  It  appears, 
therefore,  that  they  lived  well  satisfied  in  Egypt,  not  being 
disturbed  by  the  Egyptians  in  either  their  religious  views  or  in 
their  occupations  for  nearly  one  century.  Still  the  author  of 
Chronicles  mentions  an  invasion  of  the  men  of  Gath  in  the  pro- 
vince of  Goshen,  during  the  lifetime  of  Ephr aim,  son  of  Joseph. 


42  PERIOD    I, 

"And  the  sons  of  Ephraim,  Shuthelah,  and  Beted  his  son, 
and  Tahath  his  son,  and  Eladah  his  son,  and  Tahath  his  son. 
and  Zabah  his  son,  and  Shuthelah  his  son,  and  Ezer,  and 
EJcad,  whom  the  men  of  Gath  that  were  born  in  that  land  slew, 
when  they  came  down  to  take  away  their  cattle.  And  Ephraim 
their  father  mourned  many  days,  and  his  brethren  came  to 
comfort  him.  And  when  he  went  in  to  his  wife,  she  conceived 
and  bare  a  son,  and  he  called  his  name  Beriah,  because  it  went 
evil  with  his  house"  (/  Chron.  vii,  20-23).  "  And  Beraah 
and  Semah,  who  were  heads  of  the  fathers  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Ajalon,  are  those  who  drove  away  the  inhabitants  of  Gath" 
(ibid  viii,  13).  These  passages  plainly  inform  us,  that  the 
Israelites  were  attacked  by  the  inhabitants  of  Gath ;  this  attack 
was  renewed  several  times,  and  while  the  sons  of  Benjamin 
succeeded  in  re]3elling  the  enemy,  the  sons  of  Ephraim  lost 
some  of  their  men.  This  invasion  must  have  taken  place  at 
an  early  stage  of  our  history,  whereas  Ephraim  was  still  livings 
and  the  Israelites  still  were  independent  warriors.  In  support 
of  this  fact  it  may  be  quoted,  that  Josephus  mentions  an  ancient 
hatred  and  quarrel  between  the  Israelites  and  Phelistines  to 
have  existed  at  the  time  of  the  exode  (Antiqu.  II,  xv,  3); 
which  is  also  noticed  in  the  Bible  (Exodus  xiii,  17).  The 
passage  in  Chronicles  informs  us,  that  the  invaders  were  not 
the  aborigines  of  Gath,  but  the  men  of  Gath  who  were  bom  in 
that  land.  A  new  race  must  have  emigrated  to  Gath,  of  which 
the  invaders  were  the  descendants  born  in  Gath.  If  we  com- 
pare the  peaceable  spirit  of  the  Phelistines  in  the  time  of  the 
patriarchs,  with  their  warlike  expeditions  throughout  the  whole 
of  ancient  history,  it  becomes  almost  evident,  that  a  new  race 
must  have  emigrated  into  Phelistia  and  subjected  the  aborigines 
by  the  force  of  the  sword.  The  author  of  Joshua  has  left  us 
an  account  of  a  nation  inhabiting  Phelistia  and  a  large  part  of 
Palestine,  who  were  of  a  warlike  disposition,  and  who  did  not 
exist  there  in  the  time  of  the  patriarchs.  "  And  at  that  time 
came  Joshua  and  cut  off  the  Anakims  from  the  mountains,  from 
Hebron,  from  Debir,  from  Anab,  and  from  all  the  mountains  of 
Judah.  and  from  all  the  mountains  of  Israel:  Joshua  destroyed 


CHAPTER    II,  43 

them  utterly  witli  their  cities.  There  were  none  of  the  Ana- 
kims left  in  the  land  of  the  children  of  Israel,  only  in  Gaza, 
in  Gath,  and  in  Ashdod,  there  remained  (xi,  21,  22).  The 
spies  of  Moses  too  found  them  in  Hebron  and  elsewhere,  where 
formerly  the  Ilitites  led  a  peaceable  life.  The  invaders  who 
slew  the  sons  of  Ephraim  were  the  Anakims  born  in  Gath,  the 
fathers  of  whom  had  emigrated  to  that  city. 

It  is  necessary  to  a  proper  understanding  of  history  to  deviate 
from  our  general  course,  and  investigate  the  origin  and  nature 
of  this  unknown  race.  Numbers  xiii,  33,  we  are  informed  by 
the  report  of  the  spies,  that  the  Anakims  or  the  sons  of  Anak, 
are  of  the  Nephilim  or  giants,  which  is  conlirmcd  by  other 
biblical  passages  (Deutron.  i,  28,  ix,  2).  Deutronomy  ii,  10,  we 
are  further  informed  that  the  Anakims  were  identical  with  the 
Rephaim,  consequently  either  Rephaim,  Nephilim  and  Anakim 
were  three  names  for  the  same  race  of  men,  or  they  were  names 
of  three  different  tribes  of  the  same  nation ;  in  either  case  we 
must  trace  back  their  history  to  the  antediluvian  period,  where 
we  read,  "  The  Nephilim  (giants)  were  on  the  earth  in  those 
days,  and  also  after  that;  when  the  sons  of  the  gods  came  in 
unto  the  daughters  of  men,  and  they  bore  children  to  them;  the 
same  were  the  heroes  who  were  ever  the  men  of  renown." 
According  to  this  passage  the  Nephilim,  the  giants,  heroes  and 
the  men  of  renown,  with  whom  we  meet  again  in  the  myths 
of  all  ancient  nations,  were  not  the  descendants  of  the  sons  of 
the  gods  and  the  daughters  of  men;  but  they  were  on  earth 
before  and  after  that  sexual  connection  took  place.  Moses  did 
not  inform  us  about  their  origin;  we  are  left  to  suppose  that 
they  were  the  descendants  of  Cain.  If  it  were  our  province 
we  could  prove  their  early  existence  over  the  whole  of  Asia, 
and  their  long  and  bloody  warfares  with  almost  all  the  Asiatic 
nations,  which  gave  rise  to  the  numerous  giant  fables  in  ancient 
mythology.  It  is  sufficient  to  our  present  plan  to  know,  that 
they  "were  ever  the  heroes  and  the  men  of  renown."  In 
Genesis  Rabbah  (xxvi),  where  the  identity  of  the  antediluvian 
Nephilim  with  the  Rephaim  and  Anakim  is  mentioned  as  an 
unquestionable  matter,  they  are  characterised  as  an  immoral. 


44  PERIOD    I. 

violent  and  rough  race  of  men,  who  paid  no  regard  to  either 
divine  or  human  laws;  subsisting  on  robbery,  and  crime,  and 
disregarding  even  the  sacred  ties  of  matrimony ;  to  which  their 
very  name  affords  no  mean  evidence,  for  Nephilim  literally 
signifies  the  fallen,  those  who  fell  from  the  height  of  moral 
humanity, 

We  meet  them  again  in  the  time  of  Abraham,  when  Kedar- 
leomer,  the  Syrian  king,  and  his  allies,  eame  down  into  Arabia 
Petrsea  and  routed  them  on  all  points  (Genesis  xiv).  This 
appears  to  us  to  be  one  of  the  numerous  struggles  between  the 
Noachides  and  the  corrupted  race  of  the  Nephilim,  so  that  an 
unquenchable  hatred  existed  between  those  two  different  races 
of  men.  On  this  occasion  we  find  them  divided  into  five 
different  tribes,  the  Rephaim,  Susim,  Emim,  called  so  by  anti- 
cipation, Hori  and  Amalek.  This  was  not  the  end  of  the 
struggle;  Esau  continued  it  successfully  against  the  Hori, 
Amnion  overcame  the  Samsumim  or  Susim,  and  Moab  over- 
came the  Emim  (Deutr.  ii).  This  latter  struggle  could  not 
well  have  taken  place  before  the  latter  part  of  Jacob's  life; 
for  Ammon  and  Moab  were  born  almost  simultaneously  with 
Isaac;  and  Lot  having  lost  all  his  wealth  at  the  destruction 
of  Sedom,  it  was  certainly  long  after  it,  when  his  descendants 
succeeded  to  collect  such  a  powerful  tribe  as  to  be  able  to 
drive  that  old  giant  race  from  their  lands.  It  appears,  there- 
fore, that  when  the  patriarch  Jacob  had  gone  to  Egypt,  the 
Rephaim,  Anakim  or  Nephilim,  who  had  been  driven  from 
their  lands,  overrun  Palestine  and  Phelistia,  making  them- 
selves masters  of  the  land,  and  holding  it  until  driven  from 
Palestine  by  Joshua,  and  in  Phelistia  we  find  them  as  late  as 
the  days  of  David  (2  Samuel  xxi).  On  the  other  side  of  Jordan 
but  a  few  of  them  remained;  so  that  in  the  days  of  Moses  it 
was  but  Og,  the  king  of  Bashan,  who  remained  of  the  Rephaim, 
still  the  whole  province  was  called  land  of  Rephaim  (Deutr. 
iii).  They  had  emigrated  to  the  west,  where  many  traces  of 
them  existed;  there  was  the  valley  of  Rephaim,  near  Jerusa- 
lem, and  the  land  of  Rephaim,  west  of  Jordan,  mentioned  by 
Joshua  (xvii,  1G).    Hebron  was  called  Kiriath  Arba,  on  account 


CHAPTER    II.  45 

of  the  four  sons  of  Anak  residing  there,  and  on  the  road 
between  Gaza  and  Pelusium,  the  name  llafa  or  llaphia  is  still 
found;  it  is  a  place  about  15  miles  southwest  of  Gaza,  where, 
round  a  fountain  considerable  ruins  of  large  buildings  mark 
the  spot,  where  once  those  Rephaim  had  their  head-quarters 
between  Egypt  and  Phelistia.* 

In  order  to  have  a  full  account  of  the  expulsion  of  the 
Rephaim  or  Anakim  from  Arabia,  we  must  yet  quote  a  pas- 
sage of  Josephus.  "  Now  for  all  these  sons  (of  Keturah)  and 
grandsons,  Abraham  contrived  to  settle  them  in  colonies;  and 
they  took  possession  of  Troglodytes,  and  the  country  of  Arabia 
the  Happy,  as  far  as  it  reaches  to  the  Red  Sea."  Here,  again, 
we  see  the  Anakim s,  as  we  shall  henceforth  call  that  race  of 
giants,  driven  from  the  deserts  by  the  Noachides,  and  especially 
by  the  branches  of  the  tribe  of  Abraham,  as  Esau,  Amnion 
and  Moab  had  done;  for  that  the  Troglodytes  or  the  Hori 
mentioned  in  Scripture  are  identical  with  the  Anakims  has 
been  sufficiently  proved  by  the  learned  Rapoport,|  based  upon 
the  several  statements  of  the  rabbinical  literature  in  com- 
parison to  Robinson  and  Smith's  learned  inquiry  of  the  identity 
of  Eleutheropolis  and  Bethogabra,  which  has  been  adopted 
also  by  Dr.  K.  B.  Stark. j  The  subterranean  palaces,  which 
Robinson  described,  in  the  vicinity  of  Eleutheropolis  of  Pales- 
tine, which  undoubtedly  were  found,  and  gave  the  same  name 
to  a  city  in  Idumea,  are  other  traces  of  the  westward  course  of 
the  Anakim;  in  which  the  most  remarkable  fact  is,  that  the 
giants  of  the  Scandinavian  myths,  as  well  as  of  the  Sclavonic, 
Greek,  and  Hindu  nations,  are  supposed  to  have  lived  in  clefts 
of  rocks,  and  in  the  interior  of  mountains.  It  is  very  natural 
to  believe,  that  those  Anakim  also  came  to  Egypt,  and  attacked 
the  Israelites  as  their  old  and  natural  enemies.  Traces  of  their 
permanent  existence  in  Egypt  have  reached  us  by  the  Greek 
geographers.     According  to  Arternidorus,§  the  coast  from  the 

*  Ritter's  Geography,  Thl.  xiv,  p.  137-14G.     Gaza's  Kuestenstrasse. 

t  Erech  Milin,   art.  Eleutheropolis. 

}  Gaza,  £c,  Jena,  1852,  s  19. 

4  Apud  Strabo,  B.  1G,  p.  768,  775. 


46  PERIOD    I. 

Gulf  of  Suez  to  Berenice  was  inhabited  by  the  Troglodytes, 
who  made  their  dwellings  in  the  excavated  rock,  of  whom  also 
Herodotus  (ii,  104)  gives  an  account.  Comparing  these 
accounts  with  the  strange  tales  which  Greek  and  Roman  writers 
related  about  the  gigantic  figure  and  the  detestable  mode  of 
life  of  that  race  of  men,  who  also  inhabited  the  interior  of 
Egypt,*  we  are  convinced  that  they  were  identical  with  the 
Anakims  of  Scripture. 

The  best  account  of  the  Anakims'  invasion  of  Egypt,  has 
reached  us  in  the  fragments  of  Manetho.j  which  Josephus  pre- 
served in  his  refutation  of  Apion.  We  set  them  before  our 
readers  as  we  found  them.  '*  There  was  a  king  of  ours  whose 
name  was  Timous.  Under  him  it  came  to  pass,  I  know  not 
how,  that  God  was  averse  to  us,  and  there  came,  after  a  sur- 
prising manner,  men  of  ignoble  birth  out  of  the  eastern  parts, 
and  had  boldness  enough  to  make  an  expedition  into  our 
country,  and  with  ease  subdued  it  by  force,  yet  without  our 
hazarding  a  battle  with  them.  So  when  they  had  gotten  those 
that  governed  us  under  their  power,  they  afterwards  burnt 
down  our  cities,  and  demolished  the  temples  of  our  gods,  and 
used  all  the  inhabitants  in  a  most  barbarous  manner;  nay, 
some  they  slew,  and  led  their  children  and  their  wives  into 
slavery.  At  length,  they  made  one  of  themselves  king,  whose 
name  was  Salatis;  he  also  lived  at  Memphis,  and  made  both 
the  upper  and  lower  regions  pay  tribute,  and  left  garrisons  in 
places  that  were  the  most  proper  for  them.  He  chiefly  aimed 
at  securing  the  eastern  parts,  as  foreseeing  that  the  Assyrians, 
who  had  then  the  greatest  power,  would  be  desirous  of  that 
kingdom  and  invade  them ;  and  as  he  found  in  the  Saite  Nomas 
(Sethroite)  a  city  very  proper  for  his  purposes,  and  which  lay 
upon  the  Bubastic  channel,  but  with  regard  to  a  certain  theo- 
logical notion  was  called  Avaris ;  this  he  rebuilt,  and  made 
very  strong  by  the  walls  he  built  around  it,  and  by  a  most 

*  Pliny,  N.  H.,  c.  30. 

t  Manetho,  the  high  priest  of  the  temple  of  Isis,  at  Sebeunytus,  in  Lower 
Egypt,  in  the  reign  of  Ptolemy  Logi  (322-284  B.  c),  wrote  a  history  of 
Egypt, 


CHAPTER    II.  47 

numerous  garrison  of  two  hundred  and  forty  thousand  armed 
men,  which  he  put  into  it  to  keep  it.  Thither  Salatis  came  in 
summer  time,  partly  to  gather  his  corn,  and  pay  his  soldiers 
their  wages,  and  partly  to  exercise  his  armed  men,  and  thereby 
to  terrify  foreigners.  When  this  man  had  reigned  thirteen 
years,  after  him  reigned  another,  whose  name  was  Beon,  for 
forty-four  years;  after  him  reigned  another,  called  Apachnas, 
thirty-six  years  and  seyen  months;  after  him  Apophis  reigned 
sixty-one  years,  and  then  Janias  fifty  years  and  one  month; 
after  all  these  reigned  Asis  forty-nine  years  and  two  months. 
And  those  six  were  the  first  rulers  among  them,  who  were  all 
along  making  war  with  the  Egyptians,  and  were  very  desirous 
gradually  to  destroy  them  to  the  very  roots.  This  whole  nation 
was  styled  Hycsos,  that  is,  shepherd  kings ;  for  the  first  syllable 
Hyc,  according  to  the  sacred  dialect,  denotes  a  king,  as  is  sos, 
a  shepherd;  but  this,  according  to  the  ordinary  dialect;  and  of 
these  is  compounded  Hycsos;  but  some  say,  that  these  people 
were  Arabians.  These  people,  whom  we  have  before  named 
kings  and  shepherds  also,  and  their  descendants  also,  kept  pos- 
session of  Egypt  five  hundred  and  eleven  years."  Manetho, 
continues,  "  that  the  kings  of  Thebais,  and  of  other  parts  of 
Egypt,  made  an  insurrection  against  the  shepherds,  and  that  a 
terrible  and  long  war  was  made  between  them."  He  says, 
farther,  "  That  under  a  king,  whose  name  wras  Alisphrag- 
muthosis,  the  shepherds  were  subdued  by  him;  and  were, 
indeed,  driven  out  of  other  parts  of  Egypt,  but  were  shut  up 
in  a  place  that  contained  ten  thousand  acres.  This  place  was 
named  Avaris."  Manetho,  says,  that  the  shepherds  built  a 
wall  round  all  this  place,  which  was  a  large  and  strong  wall, 
and  this  in  order  to  keep  all  their  possessions  and  their  prey 
within  a  place  of  strength,  but  that  Thummosis,  the  son  of 
Alisphragmuthosis,  made  an  attempt  to  take  them  by  force 
and  by  siege,  with  four  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  men  to  lie 
round  about  them;  but  that,  upon  his  despair  of  taking  the 
place  by  that  siege,  they  came  to  a  composition  with  them, 
that  they  should  leave  Egypt  and  go,  without  any  harm  to  be 
done  to  them,  whithersoever  they  would;  and  that  after  this 


PERIOD  1 

v    with    their    whole 
lies   and  ts,  wet  in  number  than  two  hundred 

and  forty  thous  I  took  their 

Lerness  Syria,  but  that,  as  they  were  in  fear  of  the 

s    who  had  then  the  dominion  over  Asia,  they  built  a 
atry,  whieh  is  :.  and  that 

in   this  great   number  of  men.  and  callevi  : 
Jerusalem."       T        -        id  fragment  oi    Manetho.    quoted   by 
.    5.  v..  s.  is  this:   "  Amenophis.  king  of  Egypt,   was  desirous 
.      the  gods;  he  communicated  his      sd      to  a  prophet,  alsc 
called  Amenophis,  who  told  him.  that  he  might  see  the  gods,  if 
he  would  clear  the  whole  country  of  :'  -  and  oi  the  other 

impure  The  king  was   pi  as        ath  this  injunction, 

and  _   I  ( _  :her  all  that  had  any  defects  in  their  bodies,  out  of 
Igypt,  whose  numv  -    eighty   :housand.  whom   he    s 

:  me  quarries  which  are  on  the  east  sidi  of  the  Nile,  that 

they  niisht  work  in  them,  and  might  be  separated  from  the 
if  s:  oi  the  Egyptians.  After  those,  that  were  sent  to  work  in 
the  quarries,  had  continued  in  that  miserable  stati  for  a  long 
while,  the  1:     a        -       sired  to  s  I   the  city   ;:  Avaris, 

which  was  then  "..  .  solate  by  the  shepherds,  for  their  habita- 
tion and  protection:  which  desire  he  granted  them.     Now  this 

\  according  to  the  ancient  theology,  was  Typhon*S 
But  when  these  men  were  gotten  into  it,  and  found  the  place 
■  revolt,  they  appointed  themselves  a  ruler  out  of  the 
priests  of  Heliopolis.  whose  name  -  ^.\rsiph:  and  they  took 
their  oaths  that  they  would  be  obedient  to  him  in  all  thi:  _  - 
He  then,  in  the  first  place,  made  this  law  for  them:  that  they 
should  neither  worship  the  Egyptian  gods,  nor  should  abstain 
from  anv  one  of  those  sacred  animals  which  they  had  held  in 
the  highest  -:em.  but  kill  and  destroy  them  all;  that  they 
should  join  themselves  to  nobody,  but  to  those  that  were  of 
his  confederacy.     When  he  had  made  such  laws     a  and 

many  more  such  as  were  mainly  opposite  to  the  customs  of  the 
_  .-ptians.   he  gave  orders  that  they  should  use  the  multitude 
of  the  hands  they  had  in  building  walls  about  their  city,  and 
make  themselves  ready  for  a  vrar  with  king  Amenophis.  while 


he  did  himself  take  in  •  and 

that  were  polluted  with  them,  and  sent  amba 

herds    who    had    been    driven    on!  land  by 

the  city  called  Jerusalem ;  whereby  he  informed 
them    of  his  own   affairs,   and  of  1         -  that  had 

Treated  in  such  an  ignominious  manner,  and  desired  that 
they   would  come  with  :isent   to  bis      ssil  :  this 

war  against  Ecrypt.     B  that  he  would,  in  the 

first  place,  brine  them  back  to  their  ancient  city  and  country 
Avaris,  and  provide  a  plentiful  maintena:.  ;ir  multitude, 

that   he  would   protect   them   and  fight   for  them  as 
should  require,  and  would  easily  reduce  the  country  under  their 
dominion.    These  shepherds  were  all  very  glad  of  this  mess   g 
and  came  away  with  alacrity,  g  -    n  number  two 

thousand  men;  and  in  a  little  time  they  can::  I 
now  Amenophis,  the  king      :  Egypt,  upon  his  being  informed 
of  their  invasion,  was   in  great   confusion,  as  calling  to  mind 
what  Amenophis.  the  son  of  Papis,  had  :   retold  him:  and,  in 
first   place,  he  assembled  the  multitude  of  the  Egyptians, 
and    took    counsel    with    their    leaders,     and    sent    for    their 
sacred  animals  ;  especially  for  those  that  were  principally  wor- 
shiped in  their  temples,  and  gave  a  particular  charge  to  the 
priests   distinctly,  that   they  should  hide  the  im   ges     : 
gods  with  the  utmost  care.     He      -      sent  his  soi    Sethos,  who 
was  also  named  Ra:  Less   5,  from  his  father  Bhampses,  being  but 
five  years  old,  to  a  friend  of  his.     He  then  passed  on  with  the 
rest  c :  the  Egyptians,  being  three  hundred  thousand  of  the  most 
warlike  of  them,  against   the  enemy  who  met  them.     Yet  he 
did  not  join  battle  with  them;   but  thinking  that  would  be 
fighting  against  the  gods,  he  returned  and  came  to  Memphis, 
where  he  took  Apis  and  the  other  sacred  animals  for  which  he 
had  sent,   and  presently  marched  into  Ethiopia,  together 
his   whole  army  and  multitude  of  Egyptians ;  for  the  king  of 
Ethiopia  was  under  an  obligation  to  him ;  on  which  account 
he  received  him,  and   took  care  of  all  the  multitude  that  was 
with  him.  while   the   country  supplied   all  that  was   : 
for  the  food  of  the  men.     lie  also  alloted  cities  and  village  -  . 
4 


50  PERIOD    I 

this  exile,  that  was  to  be  from  its  beginning  during  those 
fatally  determined  thirteen  years.  Moreover,  he  pitched  a 
camp  for  his  Ethiopian  army,  as  a  guard  to  king  Amenophis, 
upon  the  borders  of  Egypt.  And  this  was  the  state  of  things 
in  Ethiopia.  But  for  the  people  of  Jerusalem,  when  they  came 
down  together  with  the  polluted  Egyptians,  they  treated  the  men 
in  such  a  barbarous  manner,  that  those  who  saw  how  they  sub- 
dued the  forementioned  country,  and  the  horrid  wickedness  of 
which  they  were  guilty,  thought  it  a  most  dreadful  thing;  for 
they  did  not  only  set  the  cities  and  villages  on  lire,  but  were 
not  satisfied  till  they  had  been  guilty  of  sacrilege,  and  destroyed 
the  images  of  the  gods,  and  used  them  in  roasting  those  sacred 
animals  that  used  to  be  worshiped,  and  forced  the  priests  and 
prophets  to  be  the  executioners  and  murderers  of  the  sacred 
animals,  and  then  ejected  them  naked  out  of  the  country.  It 
was  also  reported,  that  the  priest  who  ordained  their  polity  and 
their  laws,  was  by  birth  of  Heliopolis,  and  his  name  Osarsiph, 
from  Osyris,  who  was  the  god  of  Heliopolis;  but  that  when  he 
went  over  to  these  people  his  name  was  changed,  and  he  was 
called  Moses." 

The  account  of  Manetho  is  too  contradictory  of  itself,  and 
to  other  historical  sources,  to  deserve  our  implicit  faith.  He 
has  three  different  accounts  of  the  fortification  of  Avaris  by 
Salatis,  by  the  last  of  the  shepherd  kings,  and  by  Osirsiph. 
Avaris,  in  which  the  retreating  shepherds  held  out  against  the 
king  of  Egypt,  covered  an  area  of  ten  thousand  acres  of  land, 
so  fortified  that  the  large  army  of  the  Egyptians  could  find  no 
weak  place  to  attack  its  garrison,  which  is  a  matter  of  impos- 
sibility; still,  he  adds,  that  the  retreating  shepherds  built 
Jerusalem,  large  enough  for  all  of  them  with  their  families  and 
effects,  which  is  another  impossibility.  The  shepherds,  two 
hundred  and  forty  thousand  strong,  were  obliged  to  leave 
Egypt ;  but  uniting  afterwards  two  hundred  thousand  strong, 
with  the  eighty  thousand  polluted  Egyptians,  the  king,  not- 
withstanding the  friendship  of  Ethiopia,  could  not  even  join 
in  battle  with  them,  and  was  obliged  to  leave  the  country  to 
their  mercy  for  thirteen  years,  which  is  no  less  unlikely  than 


CHAPTER   II.  51 

the  former.  No  less  unlikely  is  his  statement,  that  the  king 
yielded  the  strong  Avaris  to  eighty  thousand  ill-treated  and 
ejected  Egyptians;  or  thpt  the  shepherds  left  their  new  set- 
tlements to  assist  a  body  of  leprous  men,  among  whom  were 
a  number  of  cripples,  according  to  his  own  statement.  No 
historian  has  yet  suceeded  in  accounting  for  the  five  hundred 
and  eleven  years  of  the  reign  of  the  Hyksos,  as  Manetho 
states,  in  comparison  with  other  historical  documents  or 
monuments,  or  to  find  any  one  of  the  six  names  of  the  shep- 
herd kings  mentioned  by  him,  in  any  other  historical  document 
or  monument.  Besides  this,  it  must  be  remarked,  that  while 
he  did  not  at  all  mention  the  Israelites,  for  the  Hyksos  were  the 
lords  and  not  the  slaves  of  Egypt,  and  the  eighty  thousand 
polluted  men  were  Egyptians,  as  he  himself  states — still  he  men- 
tioned Moses  and  the  Mosaic  dispensation  too  plainly  to  be  mis- 
understood, and  not  only  made  of  him  an  Egyptian  by  descent, 
but  also  called  him  by  the  name  of  Joseph,  whom  he  also  men- 
tioned as  the  first  king  of  the  Hyksos,  which  is  supported 
not  only  by  the  above  philological  statement,  but  also  by 
Manetho's  own  statement,  that  Salatis  came  to  Avaris  to  gather 
his  corn.  We  are,  therefore,  obliged  to  adopt  so  much  only  of 
his  account,  as  we  can  support  by  other  historical  evidences. 

There  were  shepherd  kings  in  Egypt ;  for  we  have  to  this 
effect  the  testimony  of  other  historians.  Herodotus  (I,  124, 
126-128)  states,  that  during  a  period,  before  the  beginning  of 
the  eighteenth  dynasty,  of  one  hundred  and  six  years,  all  sorts 
of  vices  ruled  in  Egypt.  He  could  not  learn  the  names  of 
those  rulers,  whereas  the  Egyptians  did  not  much  like  to  pro- 
nounce their  names.  These  rulers,  he  mentioned  in  connection 
with  the  builders  of  the  pyramides,  who,  he  says,  were  called 
Cheops  and  his  brother  Chephren,  who  were  the  oppressors  of 
the  people,  and  practiced  all  sorts  of  vices.  He  then  continues, 
that  it  is  also  sai4,  the  pyramides  were  built  by  a  shepherd, 
whose  name  was  Philistis  or  Philistion.  This  corresponds 
with  the  testimony  of  Eusebius,  who  states,  that  the  seven- 
teenth dynasty  consisted  of  four  Phoenician  shepherd  kings, 
who  tyrannized  over  Egypt  one  hundred  and  three  years,  under 


52  PERIOD    I. 

four  kings,  viz:  Saites,  reigned  nineteen  years;  Bnon  reigned 
forty  years ;  Apophis  reigned  fourteen  years ;  and  Archies  reigned 
thirty  years.  Diodorus  (I,  C3,  64)  agrees  with  Herodotus 
in  respect  to  one  hundred  and  six  years  of  the  occupation  of 
Egypt  by  a  foreign  and  detested  race  of  men,  who  were  the 
builders  of  the  pyramides,  for  which  the  stones  were  brought 
from  Arabia;  he  only  differs  in  the  names  and  number  of  rulers 
of  that  dynasty.  The  Hyksos  went  to  Palestine  after  their 
expulsion  from  Egypt ;  this  was  critically  ascertained  by  Heyne, 
and  by  Kenrick.* 

Typhon,  or  Baal  Zephon,  the  god  of  the  Hyksos,  is  identical 
with  the  Dagon  of  the  Phelistines ;  and  the  myths  of  that  god 
belong  more  to  Phelistia  than  to  Egypt  (Dr.  Shenk,  Gaza); 
in  Egypt,  Typhon  was  an  impaired,  captured  and  inimical 
deity,  thus  hated,  that  his  name  was  not  mentioned  (Plut.  c. 
30);  to  this  must  be  taken  the  name  Philistis,  mentioned  by 
Herodotus,  and  the  words  of  the  prophet  Amos  xi,  7,  and  we 
arrive  at  the  fact,  that  Phelistia  was  the  principal  seat  of  the 
Hyksos,  from  which  point  they  overrun  Egypt,  and  afterwards 
all  Palestine,  precisely  corresponding  with  the  biblical  records 
of  the  Anakims.  The  Anakims  came  from  Arabia;  and 
Manetho  remarks,  that  some  said  they  were  Arabs.  Typhon, 
their  god.  principally  was  the  god  of  the  wilderness,  in  which 
popular  superstitions  always  sought  the  hosts  of  evil  spirits, 
as  even  some  passages  of  the  Bible  inform  us;  and  that  the 
Anakims  were  the  worshipers  of  Typhon,  is  evident  from  their 
being  a  nation  of  the  wilderness,  and  from  the  description 
given  of  them  in  Genesis  Rabbah  (xxvi),  which  literally  cor- 
responds with  the  account  of  Manetho,  that  the  Hyksos  set  on 
fire  the  cities  and  villages,  that  they  demolished  the  temples 
and  maltreated  the  priests.  It  was  a  fallen  and  terrible  nation, 
as  their  names  Nephilim  and  Emim  imply.  The  leprous 
Egyptians  are  brought  in  connection  with  the  Hyksos,  by 
Manetho;  this  is  another  proof  that  they  were  the  Anakims; 
for  it  is  well  known,  that  the  oriental  leprosy  is  the  product 

*  Heyne  ad  Apollod.  II,  1,  4;   Kenrick,  Egypt  .off  Herod.  II,  182. 


CHAPTER    II.  53 

of  the  Arabian  desert,  where  the  Anakinis  lived  under  ground; 
to  this  comes  yet  their  propensities  for  fornication  and 
bestiality,  as  described  by  the  ancients;  the  name  Rephaim, 
which  may  signify,  those  who  need  to  be  healed;*  and  the 
statement  of  Exodus  Rabba  ii,  that  the  last  king  of  Egypt, 
before  the  exode,  was  leprous,  and  bathed  in  the  blood  of  the 
Hebrew  children,  one  hundred  and  fifty  of  which  were  daily 
killed  to  this  end.  It  appears,  therefore,  that  the  polluted 
Egyptians,  mentioned  by  Manetho,  were  the  remainders  of  the 
Hyksos,  who  were  sent  into  the  same  quarries,  whereto  their 
kings  formerly  sent  the  Egyptians ;  that  they  revolted  and  were 
assisted  by  those  of  Palestine.  All  our  sources  agree,  that  the 
expulsion  of  the  Hyksos  from  Egypt,  was  followed  immediately 
by  the  eighteenth  dynasty,  consequently  it  was  about  1500  B.C., 
wrhen  the  exode  occurred  according  to  sacred  chronology ;  there 
is  no  particle  of  evidence,  that  this  was  not  the  case.  We 
may,  therefore,  take  for  granted,  that  the  expulsion  of  the 
Hyksos  and  the  exode  occurred  simultaneously.  The  coming 
of  the  Hyksos  to  Xios  in  the  Delta,  where  they  first  conquered 
the  Phoenician  settlers,  wherefore  Eusebius  called  them  Phoeni- 
cian shepherds,  could  not  have  occurred  before  the  emigration 
of  Jacob ;  for  the  expedition  of  the  Anakims  must  have  been 
after  the  departure  of  Jacob  from  Canaan,  so  that  the  death  of 
Jacob  and  the  coming  of  the  Hyksos  to  the  Delta,  was  most 
likely  also  simultaneous.  The  wars  between  them  and  the 
Egyytians  then  commenced ;  and  it  took  a  long  while  before 
they  succeeded  in  taking  Memphis,  to  which  point  they  came 
from  the  Delta  and  from  the  Isthmus,  as  the  passage  in 
Chronicles  informs  us ;  so  that  we  may  take  for  granted,  with 
Eusebius,  Diodorus  and  Herodotus,  that  they  ruled  over  Memphis 
a  little  longer  than  one  century.  Manetho,  who  took  his  infor- 
mation from  the  nomenclatures  of  Egyptian  temples  and  from 
popular  traditions,  as  he  himself  confesses,  confounded  the 
facts  which  occurred  at  the  same  period.  He  most  likely  col- 
lected all  the  foreign  sounding  names  and  set  them  in  connection 

*This  philological  definition  was  suggested  to  us  by  our  literary  friend, 
Rev.  W.  Rothenheimer. 


54  PERIOD    I. 

with  the  Hyksos,  grouping  around  them  all  the  traditions  he 
could  learn.  Based  upon  this  investigation  we  may  continue 
our  history,  and  we  will  find  many  biblical  passages,  which 
can  not  be  understood  otherwise,  but  that  the  Israelites  suffered 
under  the  Hyksos  or  Anakim,  wherefore  they  were  afterwards 
so  much  afraid  of  the  Anakim,*  and  Moses  so  often  noticed 
them. 

The  family  of  Jacob  continued,  after  the  death  of  the 
patriarch,  to  occupy  the  province  of  Goshen;  the  seventy  male 
persons,  together  with  the  husbands  and  children  of  the 
daughters  of  Jacob,  and  their  servants  (Genesis  xlvi,  7,  26), 
rapidly  increased  to  a  powerful  tribe ;  their  manner  of  living 
and  of  occupation  maintained  them  unimpaired  in  physical 
strength;  their  industrious  habits,  and  the  wealth  then  accu- 
mulated in  Egypt,  soon  made  them  an  opulent  people;  and  as 
the  Anakim  had  overrun  Canaan,  which  the  Israelites  impos- 
sibly could  occupy  under  such  circumstances,  the  idea  of 
returning  to  Canaan,  grew  fainter  as  their  prosperity  in  Goshen 
increased.  The  Egyptians  befriended  them  as  the  family  of 
their  benefactor;  they  had  frequent  intercourse  with  the 
Egyptians;  so  that  they  were  greatly  affected  by  Egyptian 
manners,  customs,  laws,  religion,  science  and  superstition. 
They  were  governed  as  Jacob  had  ordained  each  tribe  by  its 
own  chief,  while  all  of  them  obeyed  one  chief  of  the  tribe  of 
Jehudah.  Manetho,  informs  us,  that  after  the  death  of  Jacob 
(during  the  life  of  whom  he  supposes  Joseph  or  Salatis  to  have 
reigned)  four  princes  followed  after  each  other,  in  a  period  of 
one  hundred  and  ninety-one  years.  He  calls  them  Beon, 
Apachnas,  Apophis  and  Jonian,  after  whom  Assis  or  Moses 
followed.  These  four  names  may  be  the  same  with  Jehudah, 
Hezron,  Ram  and  Aminadab.  This  state  of  things  was  the 
easier  maintained  by  peaceable  means,  whereas  all  Egypt  was 
then  divided  into  petty  kingdoms,  one  of  which,  that  of  Mem- 
phis, was,  on  account  of  Joseph,  particularly  well  disposed 
towards  the  Hebrews,  as  the  descendants  of  Israel  were  called, 


*  Numbers  xiii,  33;  Deutr.  i,  23.  ix,  2. 


CHAPTER   II.      •  55 

and  so  they  were  looked  upon  as  peaceable  neighbors  and 
friends  of  the  Egyptians.  This  state  of  things,  which  produced 
a  rapid  increase  among  the  Israelites,  must  have  lasted  nearly 
one  century,  whereas  Joseph  lived  to  the  age  of  one  hundred 
and  ten  years,  fifty-four  years  after  the  death  of  Jacob;  and 
Levi,  who  lived  twenty-seven  years  longer  than  Joseph,  though 
not  more  than  four  years  older  than  Joseph,  must  have  lived 
about  eighty  years  after  the  death  of  Jacob ;  if  we  add  to  this 
the  seventeen  years  of  Jacob's  living  in  Egypt,  it  amounts  to 
nearly  one  century  of  peace  and  uninterrupted  tranquility,  as 
we  are  informed  in  the  Bible  and  by  Josephus,  that  the  time  of 
oppression  but  begun  after  the  death  of  Joseph  and  the  whole 
of  that  generation.  At  the  end  of  the  first  and  at  the  beginning 
of  the  second  century,  the  Anakims,  the  Hyksos  of  Manetho, 
the  Phoenician  shepherds  of  Herodotus,  Diodorus  andEusebius, 
succeeded  to  take  Memphis,  then  a  new  king  arose,  who  did 
not  know  Joseph.  Their  first  attempts  to  pass  through  Goshen 
were  frustrated  by  the  Israelites,  who  may  have  lost  many  a 
brave  defender  of  the  nation,  besides  the  sons  of  Ephraim;  the 
attempts  of  the  Anakims  were  renewed  year  after  year;  until 
finally  the  Israelites,  although  by  nature  a  strong  and  fearless 
race,  still  were  overcome  by  the  Anakims,  who  on  account  of 
their  numerous  warlike  expeditions  in  Canaan,  Phoenicia,  Phe- 
listia,  and  probably  also  in  Greece,  were  practiced  in  warlike 
enterprises,  while  the  Israelites  living  for  nearly  one  century  in  a 
state  of  profound  peace,  occupied  with  agricultural  pursuits, 
could  not  long  offer  them  effectual  resistance.  After  the 
Israelites  were  overcome,  the  Anakims  leaving  a  sufficient 
garrison  among  them,  and  taking  along  the  most  active  men, 
women,  and  also  children,  to  sell  them  as  slaves,  marched 
towards  the  other  Egyptian  countries,  joining  with  those  coming 
from  Xois,  where  they  did  not  meet  with  much  resistance; 
as  the  Egyptians,  in  consequence  of  the  wealth  accumulated 
there  during  the  last  century,  had  grown  "  lazy  and  delicate 
as  to  painstaking,  and  gave  themselves  up  to  other  pleasures, 
and  in  particular  to  the  love  of  gain,"  as  Josephus  remarks.  The 
petty  kings  were  dethroned;  the  priests  were  divested  of  their 


56  PERIOD    I. 

political  power;  the  cast  of  warriors  were  probably  calmed  by 
being  enlisted  among  the  warriors  of  the  invaders;  the  agricul- 
tural and  pastoral  people,  who  were  a  mere  zero  in  the 
Egyptian  government,  could  care  but  little  for  this  sudden 
change  of  government ;  those  who  did  not  submit  to  the  new 
king,  either  fled  to  Thebes,  or  were  compelled  to  obedience  by 
being  sold  as  slaves  to  other  Egyptians ;  or  they  were  sent  into 
the  quarries,  on  the  other  side  of  the  Red  sea.  The  most  dan- 
gerous enemies  of  the  invaders,  however,  were  the  Israelites, 
who  had  offered  them  the  most  effectual  resistance,  and  whom 
they  hated  most  violently  on  account  of  former  occurrences, 
wherefore  the  new  Pharaoh  said  to  his  people,  not  to  the 
Egyptians  at  large,  "Behold,  the  children  of  Israel  are  more 
and  mightier  than  we."  This  could  not  possibly  refer  to  the 
whole  Egyptian  nation ;  but  it  was  true  in  regard  to  the  invaders. 
The  king  then  continued,  "  Come  on,  let  us  deal  wisely  with 
them,  lest  they  multiply  audit  come  to  pass,  that  when  there 
falleth  out  any  war,  they  join  also  unto  our  enemies,  and  fight 
also  against  us,  and  so  get  them  up  out  of  the  land."  They 
had  greatly  depopulized  Goshen,  by  selling  into  slavery  many 
of  the  warriors,  together  with  their  families;  still  they  were 
afraid  of  the  Hebrews,  whom  Manetho  calls  Assyrians,  because 
the  term,  Hebrews,  is  derived  from  eber,  the  other  side,  and  so 
were  all  those  called  who  came  from  beyond  the  Euphrates; 
and  the  Assyrians  once  possessed  all  the  land  between  the 
•lower  Euphrates  and  Tigris.  The  Hyksos  Pharaoh,  therefore, 
appointed  taskmasters  over  the  people,  who  not  only  took 
taxes  from  the  people,  but  also  selected  the  stoutest  of  them  to 
build  fortifications  in  the  very  heart  of  their  country;  so  they 
fortified  Pithom  and  Raamscs  or  Avaris,  which  cities,  especially 
the  latter,  were  garrisoned  with  large  forces,  in  order  to  hold 
the  people  in  a  state  of  subjection.  Besides  those  fortified 
cities,  the  Hebrews,  together  with  disobedient  Egyptians,  were 
forced  to  build  pyramides,  dams,  canals,  other  fortifications 
and  ramparts,  in  order  to  extinguish  in  them  every  spark  of 
liberty;  to  which  end,  the  taskmasters  and  such  Egyptians 
as  had  bought  Hebrew  slaves,  were  instructed  to   treat  them 


CHAPTER   II.  57 

with  rigid  severity.  But,  notwithstanding  these  inhuman 
measures  of  the  government,  the  Israelites  increased  rapidly, 
and  their  numbers  became  a  matter  of  tear  to  the  trembling 
invaders,  who  held  the  land  by  force  only,  and  who  had  to  fear 
that  an  insurrection  of  the  Hebrews  would  be  seconded  by  the 
Egyptian  priests,  and  by  the  kings  of  Thebes;  therefore  the 
midwives  were  instructed  to  destroy  the  male  offspring  of  the 
Hebrews  immediately  after  their  birth.  But  the  midwives 
fearing  the  Lord,  did  not  kill  the  innocent  children;  and  so 
Pharaoh  commanded  all  his  people  to  destroy  every  new-born 
male  child  of  the  Hebrews,  wherever  and  whenever  found. 
Jochebed,  the  wife  and  aunt  of  Amram,  the  son  of  Kehath,  the 
son  of  Levi,  the  son  of  Jacob,  at  this  time  gave  birth  to  a  male 
child,  which  the  mother  hid  for  about  three  months,  that  none 
of  the  agents  of  Pharaoh  should  discover  and  kill  it.  But  the 
orders  of  the  king  were  so  rigidly  enforced,  that  she  could  no 
longer  conceal  her  child;  she,  therefore,  laid  it  in  a  little  chest, 
and  setting  it  on  the  brink  of  the  Nile,  exposed  it  to  the  mercy 
of  the  finder.  Miriam,  its  sister,  stood  at  some  distance  to 
observe  the  fate  of  the  child.  The  daughter  of  Pharoah  had 
come  down  to  bathe  in  the  Nile,  and  she  found  the  weeping 
babe.  Being  moved  by  the  tears  of  the  boy,  she,  although 
knowing  that  it  was  a  Hebrew  child,  resolved  upon  saving  it. 
When  Miriam  saw  this,  she  asked  the  princess  whether  she 
might  go  and  call  a  nurse  to  take  care  of  the  child ;  and  being 
ordered  to  do  so,  she  called  upon  her  mother,  who  came  and 
received  her  child  from  the  hands  of  the  princess,  with  the 
promise  of  good  wages  if  she  took  proper  care  of  it.  The 
mother  undoubtedly  did  her  duty,  and  when  the  child  had  grown 
up,  it  was  brought  to  the  princess,  who  adopted  it  as  her  son, 
and  named  him  Moses.*  There  is  no  great  man  in  history, 
whose  birth  and  cradle  is  not  surrounded  with  the  most  extra- 
ordinary and  marvelous  stories,  announcing  to  the  world  that 
a  great  event  has  taken  place.    While  the  Bible  narrates,  in  the 

*  Mosheh,  according  to  the  Bible,  because  drawn  out  of  the  water-,  derived 
from  the  verb  mashah,  to  draw-  but,  according  to  others,  Mo  signifies  water, 
and  sheh.  drawn,  in  the  Egyptian  tongue. 


58  PERIOD    I. 

most  simple  and  touching  manner,  the  birth  and  first  fate  of 
Moses,  the  rabbins,  Joscphus  and  Philo,  know,  that  the 
Egyptian  magicians  predicted  his  birth  and  his  career;  that 
God  appeared  to  Amram  in  a  dream,  and  told  him  that  Moses, 
the  redeemer  of  his  nation,  will  be  born  by  his  wife;  that  the 
house  was  filled  with  light,  when  the  child  was  born;  that  he 
refused  to  be  nursed  by  any  other  woman  but  his  mother; 
he  was  as  tall,  beautiful  and  intelligent  a  child  as  none  was 
seen  before;  that  he  was  never  addicted  to  childish  plays,  but 
always  studied  and  contemplated,  so  that  he  at  the  age  of 
twelve  had  outdone  all  his  Egyptian  teachers  in  learning  and 
wisdom.  These  sayings  reappear  so  often  in  ancient  history, 
that  they  can  not  claim  the  confidence  of  an  intelligent  man. 
Josephus  informs  us,  that  the  princess  desired  her  father  to 
make  her  adoptive  son  successor  to  the  crown,  which  Pharaoh 
did.  Moses  was  severely  persecuted  by  the  magicians  and 
priests  on  this  account,  and  but  the  assertions  of  his  adoptive 
mother  could  save  his  life.  When  he  had  reached  the  age  of 
maturity,  he  was  placed  at  the  head  of  an  army  to  march 
against  Ethiopia,  the  people  of  which  country,  most  likely 
Thebes,  were  at  war  with  the  (Hyksos)  Pharaoh,  which  also 
Manetho  mentions.  Moses  led  his  army  from  one  victory  to 
the  other,  so  that  the  enemy  sued  for  peace,  which  was 
granted;  one  of  the  stipulations  was,  that  Moses  married 
Tharbis,  the  daughter  of  the  king  of  Ethiopia.*  After  Moses 
had  returned  to  Memphis,  during  that  time  the  Apophis  of 
Eusebius  must  have  succeeded  his  father ;  the  jealousy  of  the 
officers  at  the  king's  court  had  assumed  a  violent  nature ;  he 
had  not  only  the  confidence  of  the  Egyptians,  but  also  of  the 
Hebrews;  for  when  he  was  great,  he  went  out  to  his  brothers, 
and  undoubtedly  thought  of  ameliorating  their  miserable  con- 
dition. Pharaoh  and  his  officers  may  have  found  this  politics 
dangerous  to  their  own  interests;  for  if  he,  who  possessed  the 
confidence  of  the  Egyptians  and  the  Hebrews,  should  succeed, 
will  he  not  either  expel  the  invaders,  or  deprive  them  of  their 
power?     It  was,  therefore,  deemed  necessary  to  dispose  of  him 

*  Vide  Numbers  xii,  1. 


CHAPTER    II, 


59 


in  one  way  or  other.  An  opportunity  was  soon  offered.  Moses, 
frequently  mixing  among  the  oppressed  people,  one  day  saw  an 
Egyptian,  who  killed  a  Hebrew-  slave;*  Moses  in  his  anger 
lynched  the  murderer,  but  knowing  as  he  did,  that  his  name 
was  much  disliked  at  court,  he  covered  the  corpse  with  sand. 
When  he  came  among  them  some  other  day,  he  found  a  Hebrew 
officer  chastising  a  Hebrew  slave,  Moses  rebuked  the  assailant, 
upon  which  he  was  answered,  "  Doest  thou  mean  to  kill  me, 
as  thou  hast  killed  the  Egyptian?"  Moses  was  afraid  the 
matter  would  be  brought  before  Pharaoh,  who  would  improve 
this  chance  to  dispose  of  him,  with  an  appearance  of  justice. 
His  apprehension  was  not  unfounded;  Pharaoh,  indeed,  was 
informed  of  the  affair,  and  intended  to  have  Moses  killed.  But 
Moses  was  informed  of  this  intention,  and  left  Egypt.  It  was 
dangerous  for  him  to  flee  to  Thebes,  and  throw  himself  into 
the  arms  of  a  former  enemy;  he  could  not  escape  across  the 
Isthmus,  whereas  the  Anakims  were  in  possession  of  Phelistia, 
as  well  as  of  Egypt;  therefore  he  had  to  cross  the  Red  sea  and 
seek  shelter  in  Arabia.  It  was  there  that  he  saw  some  rude 
shepherds  driving  away  some  shepherdesses  from  the  troughs, 
where  they  gave  water  to  their  flocks ;  but  Moses  assisted  the 
weaker  party.  When  the  shepherd  girls  had  come  home  to 
their  father,  who  was  a  priest  of  Midian,  which  according  to 
Josephus,  was  a  city  on  the  Red  sea,  called  after  one  of 
Abraham's  sons  by  Keturah;  they  told  him  of  the  Egyptian, 
who  had  aided  them  against  the  other  shepherds ;  upon  which 
Moses  was  sought,  found  and  brought  into  the  house  of  the 
priest;  he  agreed  to  live  there,  and  married  Ziphorah,  the 
daughter  of  the  priest,  Jethro,f  and  begat  with  her  two  sons, 
Gershom  and  Eliezer. 

It  must  have  been  a  singular  contrast  for  Moses  to  be 
first  a  high  officer  at  the  court  of  Egypt,  or  as  Josephus 
said,   successor    to    the    crown,  and  now  a    simple  shepherd. 

*  If  the  second  Vayach  signifies  he  killed,  the  first  Macceh  being  derived 
from  the  same  radix,  must  have  the  same  signification. 

f  An  Arabian  sheik,  as  some  suppose;  the  prophet  Shoaib,  as  others  sup- 
pose; the  high  priest  of  the  temple  of  Medina,  as  again  others  suppose. 


60  PERIOD    I. 

He  saw  first  the  learning,  civilization,  pomp,  splendor  and 
corruption  of  Egypt ;  now  he  saw  a  simple  and  peaceable 
people  in  their  natural  state  of  purity.  In  Egypt  he  saw  but 
the  oppressed  and  the  oppressor;  but  now  he  saw  a  people  in 
the  full  enjoyment  of  liberty.  There  he  heard  the  priests 
speak  of  their  seven  gods,  the  sacred  animals  and  vegetables, 
kneeling  at  the  shrine  of  physical  nature,  and  worshiping  its 
grossest  objects;  now  he  saw  a  people  kneeling  before  sun, 
moon  and  stars  only,  and  raising  the  eye  to  a  blue,  ethereal 
sky.  In  Egypt  he  heard  of  Hermes,  Thaut  and  Manes;  but  in 
Arabia  he  heard  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob.  He  had  heard 
the  history  of  the  creation  of  the  first  human  parents,  of  the 
primitive  ages,  of  the  flood,  from  the  Egyptians  and  the 
Hebrews,  now  he  heard  it  from  the  Arabs — each  nation  on 
the  globe  has  the  same  stories  covered  under  other  fictions — 
he  compared  the  myths,  and  with  the  help  of  God,  he  produced 
the  first  eleven  chapters  of  Genesis,  in  wiiich  the  Egyptian  and 
Arabic  accounts,  as  well  as  the  master  pen  of  Moses,  are 
plainly  visible.  He  then  compared  the  traditions  of  the 
Hebrews  regarding  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob,  with  those  of 
the  Arabs,  on  the  same  subject;  he  also  most  likely  visited  all 
the  spots  which  tradition  had  pointed  out  to  him — his  exact 
knowledge  of  the  geography  of  Palestine  is  a  plain  demonstra- 
tion that  he  must  have  been  in  that  country — he  probably  saw 
the  altars  built  by  the  patriarchs,  found  inscriptions,  marks, 
and,  most  likely,  also  documents;  he  compared  again, exercised 
his  own  judgment ;  and,  with  the  help  of  God,  he  compiled  the 
rest  of  the  book  of  Genesis.  He  comprehended  the  mission 
which  Abraham  had  adopted  for  his  tribe,  and  for  which  the 
patriarchs  lived  and  worked;  he  comprehended  the  eternal 
truths  which  pervaded  the  heart  of  Abraham  and  his  descend- 
ants ;  he  was  inspired  by  the  sublime  virtues  and  pure  life  of 
his  early  ancestors;  and  having  confidence  in  God  and  in  truth, 
he  was  convinced  that  the  sacred  verities,  which  his  ancestors 
possessed  and  guarded,  in  order  to  maintain  them  for  the  world 
by  their  descendants,  could  not  be  lost  entirely  among  his 
Hebrew  brethren   in  Egypt,  although  they  had  been  greatly 


CHAPTER    IT.  61 

addicted  to  Egyptian  superstition  and  corruption;  and  if  they 
were  yet  in  possession  of  a  part  of  those  elevating  truths,  if 
they  felt  yet  proudly  about  the  virtues  of  their  noble  ancestors; 
they  were  able  to  shake  off  the  yoke  of  slavery,  form  a  people 
in  the  sense  and  will  of  father  Abraham,  and  eternize  the 
truths  inherited  by  their  ancestors.  He  then  thought  of  the 
wretched  condition  of  his  brethren;  of  the  violence  and  power 
of  Pharaoh;  of  the  immense  strength  of  his  army,  and  invincible 
fortifications ;  thought  of  his  own  inability  to  inspire  the  mul- 
titude by  the  power  of  speech;  of  the  imminent  danger  con- 
nected with  such  an  undertaking.  All  these  ideas  struggled 
in  his  great  mind  against  his  ardent  desire  to  save  his  people, 
and  to  eternize  the  truths  which  his  ancestors  possessed  and 
guarded;  and  so  it  came  to  pass,  that  one  day,  when  he  had 
led  the  flocks  of  his  father-in-law  to  mount  Horeb,  "An  angel 
of  the  Lord  appeared  unto  him  in  a  flame  of  fire,  out  of  the 
midst  of  a  bush;  and  he  looked,  and  behold,  the  bush  burnt 
with  fire,  and  the  bush  was  not  consumed.-'  The  bush  was 
not  consumed  with  the  horrid  fire;  if  Israel  was  not  consumed, 
notwithstanding  the  tyranny  of  the  Hyksos,  it  could  be  saved. 
He  could  not  find  a  reasonable  cause  to  satisfy  him  that  his 
undertaking  must  be  successful;  but  he  was  aware,  that  he 
was  going  to  do  a  great  and  good  work,  and  so  God  promised 
him  special  assistance,  by  which  Moses  overcame  all  the  diffi- 
culties which  struggled  in  his  mind;  and  so  he  returned  to 
Jethro,  announcing  to  him  his  intention  to  return  to  Egypt,  took 
his  wife  and  children,  and  after  a  stay  of  about  forty  years,  as 
the  tradition  says,  he  returned  to  Egypt.  ' '  How  very  different, " 
says  Salvador,  "  was  the  position  of  Moses  from  that  of  other 
lawgivers  of  antiquity.  Lycurgus,  Menos  and  Draco  were  born 
among  nations  who  were  united  under  a  certain  standard  of 
laws,  and  who  were  in  possession  of  a  land  of  their  own;  so 
those  lawgivers  were  brought  up  to  their  eminent  vocation 
by  a  natural  process  of  affairs.  Confucius  promulgated  his 
precepts  to  his  fellow-citizens  in  profound  peace.  Mahomet, 
that  powerful  spirit,  gave,  after  fifteen  years  of  solitary  contem- 
plation, to  nations  whose  civil  affairs  had  been  settled  previously, 


62  PERIOD    I. 

a  new  code  of  laws,  consisting  of  a  peculiar  compound  of  ancient 
maxims,  which  he  suited  to  their  state  of  affairs,  and  imposed 
by  the  edge  of  the  sword.  Moses  appears  alone:  having  no 
command  over  material  forces  of  any  kind;  the  individuals 
of  whom  he  is  to  make  a  people,  have  no  country  of  their  own; 
before  he  can  give  them  laws,  he  must,  so  to  say,  conquer 
them;  must  discourage  their  oppressors,  must  elevate  the  mind 
from  a  long  and  severe  oppression;  must  overcome  a  horrid 
mass  of  difficulties."  Let  us  see  how  he  overcame  them.  Aaron, 
the  eldest  brother  of  Moses,  was  the  first  man  whom  he  met; 
to  him  he  explained  his  plans  and  aims;  charging  Aaron,  who 
was  a  more  expert  speaker  than  Moses,  to  address  the  people 
in  the  affair.  When  he  arrived  at  Goshen,  a  public  convention 
of  the  elders  of  the  people  took  place;  Aaron  addressed  them, 
and  although  the  traditional  account  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and 
Jacob,  of  their  sacred  mission,  which  they  bequeathed  to  their 
descendants,  and  of  the  land  of  which  they  had  taken  posses- 
sion to  this  purpose,  was  almost  forgotten;  still  the  elders  of 
the  people  were  convinced,  that  the  time  had  arrived  for  their 
redemption  from  bondage.  Moses  and  Aaron,  consequently, 
went  to  Pharaoh  and  demanded  him  in  the  name  of  their  God 
and  an  oppressed  people,  to  give  permission  to  the  Hebrews 
to  make  a  journey  of  three  days  into  the  wilderness,  for  the 
purpose  of  celebrating  a  feast.  But  Pharaoh  refused  to  comply 
with  their  demand;  he  made  use  of  words  which  decidedly 
showed  him  to  be  the  Hyksos  king,  of  Manetho,  who  was  the 
enemy  of  religion,  the  servant  of  Typhon;  he  said,  "Who  is 
the  Lord,  that  I  shall  obey  his  voice?"  Still,  afraid  that  a 
general  insurrection  might  compel  him  to  comply  with  the 
demands  of  Moses,  he  commanded  his  officers  to  treat  the 
Hebrews  with  doubled  severity,  which  was  rigidly  enforced. 
The  people  thus  cruelly  treated,  in  consequence  of  the  first 
attempt  of  Moses,  endeavored  to  stop  his  operations.  But  Moses 
had  learned  by  this  doubled  severity  on  account  of  his  demands, 
that  the  tyrant  trembled,  fearing  a  general  rise  of  the  people; 
so  he  endeavored  to  organize  a  general  insurrection,  but  the 
mass  of  the  people  did  not  understand  his  great  plans;  they 
were  too  much  oppressed,  and  so  they  did  not  mind  him. 


CHAPTER   II.  63 

Still,  Moses  improved  his  chance;  he  went  to  Pharaoh,  and 
demanded  him  to  give  permission  to  the  Hebrews  to  leave  the 
country  entirely;  but  the  king  boldly  refused  to  comply  with 
his  demands.  Moses  was  not  easily  discouraged;  he  pursued  his 
plan  in  three  different  ways;  he  attempted  to  inspire  the  peo- 
ple for  his  mission;  he  endeavored  to  break  the  obstinacy  of  the 
king;  and,  undoubtedly,  he  also  called  on  the  kings  of  Thebes 
to  cooperate  with  him  to  defeat  the  common  enemy.  The  ter- 
ror of  the  Hyksos  was  so  great  with  the  people,  that  none  of 
these  objects  was  easily  achieved;  still  Moses  succeeded,  so 
that  he  not  only  gradually  gained  the  confidence  of  the  Hebrews, 
but  "  The  man  Moses  was  also  very  great  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
in  the  eyes  of  the  servants  of  Pharaoh  and  in  the  eyes  of  the 
people."  He  succeeded  so  well  with  the  Egyptians,  that  they 
provided  the  Hebrews  with  money  and  arms  (Exodus  xi,  2,  3; 
xiii,  18);  that  even  the  officers  next  to  the  king,  advised  him 
to  let  the  Hebrews  go  (ibid  x,  7).  But  how  did  he  achieve 
this  success  ?  With  the  intelligent  portion  of  the  Hebrews  it 
was  easy  for  him,  as  we  have  seen  above,  to  gain  their  confi- 
dence ;  they  were  intimately  acquainted  with  his  great  plans 
and  designs,  and  were  desirous  to  assist  him  in  the  great  work 
of  redemption.  The  intelligent  portion  of  the  Egyptian  popu- 
lation certainly  coincided  with  him  to  reduce  the  foreign 
tyrants;  the  mass  of  the  people  was  inspired  by  the  miracles 
which  he  performed;  the  slaveholders  and  the  king  were  terri- 
fied by  the  plagues  which  came  over  the  country,  and  threatened 
to  lay  waste  the  whole  land;  about  which  Eichhorn  remarks:* 
that  the  plagues  as  described  in  Exodus  are  usual  in  Egypt, 
and  that  it  was  but  their  almost  simultaneous  appearance 
which  terrified  the  people.  So  also  H.  du  Bois-Ayme,  one  of 
the  learned  members  of  the  French  expedition  to  Egypt, 
remarks:  |  "In  that  part  of  Scripture,  treating  on  the  epoch 
of  the  exode,   are  found  many  facts,  which,   although  being 

*  Eichhorn  de  Egypli  anno  mirabili.  KosenmUller  scholia  in  Exodum, 
cap.  vii. 

t  Description  de  TEgypte,  Tom.  I,  de  PEtat  ancien— Notice  sur  le  srjour 
des  Hubreux  en  Egypte, 


64  PERIOD    I. 

uncommon,  still  are  compatible  to  the  records  of  profane 
authors  and  to  the  present  state  of  the  country.."  The  Bible 
does  not  inform  us,  that  those  plagues  were  uncommon  in 
Egypt;  on  the  contrary,  they  are  frequently  called  "Egyptian 
plagues,"  some  of  which  even  the  magicians  of  Pharaoh  could 
produce;  nor  are  we  forced  by  any  one  passage  in  Scripture, 
to  suppose  that  these  plagues  took  place  within  a  short  period 
of  time;  it  rather  appears,  that  years  elapsed  before  the  plan  of 
Moses  was  matured  for  realization.  It  was  the  will  of  God, 
that  those  plagues  happened;  Moses  made  the  best  use  of  the 
occurrence  to  inspire  the  people  with  hope,  and  to  deter  the 
Egyptian  slaveholders.  The  king  was  pressed  on  one  side  by 
the  friends  of  Moses,  and  by  those  whom  the  plagues  had 
terrified,  to  let  the  Hebrews  go;  and  on  the  other  side,  a  gene- 
ral insurrection  of  the  Hebrews  threatened  him  with  all  its 
terror;  and  on  the  third  side,  there  were  the  kings  of  Thebes, 
as  Manetho  informs  us,  who  eagerly  waited  for  an  opportunity 
to  expel  the  invaders  from  the  Egyptian  territory.  Pharaoh 
would  have  permitted  the  Hebrews  to  depart,  but  now  they 
were  dispersed  over  almost  the  whole  country,  and  were  not  as 
dangerous  as  if  he  had  permitted  them  to  meet  and  to  organize 
in  one  body,  to  go  into  the  desert,  connect  with  those  working 
in  the  quarries  on  the  other  side  of  the  Nile,  march  back  upon 
Egypt  and  bring  Pharaoh  between  two  armies.  Moses  must 
have  taken,  meanwhile,  the  city  of  Raamses  or  the  Avaris  of 
Manetho ;  for  it  says  in  our  records  (Exodus  xii,  37),  that  the 
children  of  Israel  departed  from  that  city.  Being  in  possession 
of  this  valuable  point,  he  had  a  place  where  to  organize  the 
body  of  his  army,  consisting  of  those  who  lived  in  Goshen, 
being  the  best  kernel  of  the  nation.  Here  was  the  place  from 
which  he  could  safely  organize  an  insurrection  of  the  Hebrew 
slaves  all  over  the  country.  Manetho  knew  well  enough,  that 
Moses  was  in  possession  of  Avaris,  but  he  did  not  know  the 
circumstances  connected  with  it.  Whether  the  time  of  the 
plagues  lasted  thirteen  years,  as  Manetho  supposes,  and  whether 
Moses  had  possession  of  Avaris  during  all  this  time  is  not 
contrary  to  the  text  of  the  Bible ;  but  it  does  not  appear  to  us 


CHAPTER    II.  65 

necessary  to  enter  upon  a  critical  investigation  in  order  to 
ascertain  it.  When  neither  the  plagues,  nor  the  words  of  the 
magicians  and  other  wise  men,  nor  the  threatening  insurrection 
could  move  Pharaoh  to  allow  the  Hebrews  to  depart  in  peace, 
as  it  was  the  desire  of  Moses  and  of  the  people;  Moses  pre- 
pared a  general  rise  of  the  Hebrews  in  one  night,  the  night 
between  the  14th  and  15th  day  of  the  first  month,  Nissan  or 
April.  But  nothing  is  more  dangerous  and  horrible  than  an 
insurrection  of  slaves,  who  have  been  deprived  for  years  of  the 
inalienable  rights  of  man,  and  who  at  once  gain  liberty  and 
superiority  of  strength.  Moses,  in  order  to  prevent  the  horrible 
scenes  connected  with  such  a  general  rise,  commanded  them  in 
the  name  of  God  to  be  prepared  for  departure  that  night;  but 
each  family  should  be  in  its  respective  house  ready  for  depart- 
ure, and  spend  the  night  in  religious  devotion  to  the  God  who 
would  redeem  them  this  night.  The  blood  of  the  sacrifice 
brought  on  that  occasion  should  be  sprinkled  on  the  door-posts, 
in  order  that  the  destroyer,  who  was  to  rage  that  night,  should 
not  enter  their  houses.  So  those  slaves  were  kept  in  their 
houses  under,  the  influence  of  a  religious  awe ;  and  none  of  the 
horrid  scenes  generally  connected  with  such  an  affair  were 
enacted  during  that  night.  At  midnight,  our  records  state,  the 
Lord  smote  all  the  first-born  of  the  land  of  Egypt.  It  would 
appear  to  us,  as  Aben  Ezra  already  remarked,  that  parties  of 
the  army  of  Moses  at  Avaris  or  Raamses,  were  sent  to  the 
country  to  kill  the  first-born  or  the  defenders,  of  all  those  who 
were  opposed  to  the  departure  of  the  Hebrews.  This  had  its 
good  effect.  Pharaoh  was  now  forced  by  the  terrified  people 
to  dismiss  the  Hebrews;  the  people  were  so  terrified,  that  they 
drove  out  the  Hebrews  without  giving  them  time  to  bake  their 
cakes  for  the  journey.  They  assembled  around  Avaris  or 
Raamses,  where  those  present  before  had  already  been  organized, 
according  to  tribes,  in  twelve  divisions,  as  mentioned  before, 
so  that  every  new  comer  had  only  to  take  his  place  with  his 
respective  tribe.  It  would  appear,  that  they  were  encamped 
seven  days  around  Avaris  or  Raamses,  in  order  to  be  properly 
organized,  during  which  time  those  scattered  over  the  country 
5 


G6  PERIOD    I. 

could  join  them,  and  also  those  who  desired  to  go  with  them 
could  improve  the  chance;  and  a  mixed  multitude  joined 
them.  Those  seven  days  were  also  celebrated  as  the  feast  of 
liberty  and  delivery,  and  sanctioned  as  the  annual  feast  of 
Passover  for  the  Israelites  of  coming  generations.  Since 
they  had  to  bake  their  dough  in  the  sun  without  being  leavened; 
they  were  commanded  to  commemorate  this  event,  by  eating 
annually,  at  that  feast,  unleavened  cakes;  and  since  the  first 
born  of  the  Egyptians  were  slain,  and  theirs  was  saved,  it 
was  ordained,  that  the  first-born  of  man  and  beast  should  be 
sacred  to  God. 

This  is  the  first  time  in  history,  that  a  nation  claimed  and 
attained  its  rights;  the  first  time  that  a  despot  was  chastised 
by  an  offended  and  oppressed  people.  And  how  beautifully  is  it 
narrated  in  the  Bible ;  it  is  God  himself  who  interferes  on  behalf 
of  the  oppressed,  and  chastises  the  tyrant.  God  sanctions  the 
struggle  of  a  nation  for  its  liberty  and  independence. 

After  the  Israelites  were  properly  organized,  they  started  to 
leave  the  country,  marching  towards  the  Isthmus.  Their  road 
has  been  ascertained  by  Robinson  and  Smith;  but  our  space 
allows  us  not  to  be  minute  on  this  subject.  Moses  had  more 
than  one  reason  for  not  leading  the  Israelites  across  the  Isthmus ; 
for,  in  the  first  place,  they  would  have  come  into  the  midst  of 
the  Hyksos*  who  had  their  connections  across  the  Isthmus, 
where  they  undoubtedly  were  well  fortified,  in  order  to  cover 
their  retreat  from  Egypt  in  case  of  necessity  (Exodus  xiii,  17); 
and,  in  the  second  place,  if  he  had  succeeded  in  forcing  his  way 
through  the  lines  of  the  Hyksos,  he  would  have  been  unable  to 
take  Canaan,  or  to  organize  them  into  a  nation  able  and  pre- 
pared for  the  mission  which  inspired  his  mind.  He,  therefore, 
at  the  first  place  of  encampment,  Succoth,  where  the  remains 
of  Joseph  were  deposited,  which  were  taken  along  by  the 
Israelites, — altered  his  course,  and  marched  towards  the  Red 
sea.  For  this  he  had  a  good  many  reasons ;  it  was  necessary 
to  have  the  people  go  through  the  Red  sea  by  a  miracle,  so  that 
they  be  convinced  of  the  impossibility  of  returning  to  Egypt; 
as   there    were   a   great   number    among    them    who   disliked 


CHAPTER    II.  67 

to  leave  Egypt  (Ex.  xiv,  12),  and  they  frequently  uttered  their 
desire  to  return  to  Egypt.  It  was  also  necessary,  that  Pharaoh, 
most  likely  the  Archies  of  Eusebius,  be  thoroughly  chastised 
before  they  left  the  country;  for  they  were  by  no  means  safe 
on  the  other  side  of  the  Red  sea,  nor  were  they  out  of  the 
reach  of  the  Egyptian  army.  Finally,  it  is  not  unlikely,  that 
Moses  cooperated  with  the  kings  of  Thebes,  who  were  led  by 
Amosis,  the  founder  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty,  to  which  the 
terms  of  the  Bible,  "And  they  (the  Israelites)  saved  Egypt," 
is  no  mean  support;  therefore,  Moses  manoeuvered  about  in  the 
desert,  either  to  hold  Pharaoh  in  a  state  of  excitement,  and  so 
to  withdraw  his  attention  from  the  commotions  in  the  south  of 
Memphis;  or  to  attract  him  with  his  army  into  the  desert, 
where  he  might  find  the  end  of  his  power  by  the  waves  of  the 
Red  sea;  or,  if  this  was  not  effected,  Amosis  could  find  time 
to  occupy  Memphis.  Therefore  they  directed  their  steps 
towards  the  Red  sea,  and  having  passed  Etham  they  encamped 
at  a  place  which  the  Bible  describes  to  be  between  Migdol  and 
the  sea,   before  Pi  ha-Hiroth  and  Baal  Zephon. 

We  are  also  informed  that  God  went  before  them  in  a  pillar 
of  cloud  at  day  time,  and  of  fire  at  night,  to  lead  them  on  the 
way;  which  would  inform  us,  that  the  whole  manoeuvre  of 
Moses  was  a  profound  secret  to  the  people.  Don  Abarbanel 
supposes  this  to  be  a  figurative  description  of  Providence  which 
led  them.  Van  der  Hart  supposes  it  was  the  sacred  fire  of  the 
priests.  Others  suppose  it  was  identical  with  the  pole  which 
Alexander  the  Great  used  to  give  signals  in  the  camp,  of 
which  smoke  emitted  at  day  time,  and  fire  at  night  time,* 
to  which  means  Napoleon  is  said  to  have  resorted,  under 
similar  circumstances;!  and  that  the  Arabs  still  do  so. J  Ac- 
cording to  which,  it  would  have  been  a  fire  of  resinous  fuel, 
which  emits  a  dense  smoke  at  day  time ;  and  a  flame  of  fire  at 
night  time,  having  been  necessary  in  order  that  the  different 
divisions   of  the   army  be  not  separated  from  each  other.     We, 

*  Curtius  Rufus,  lib.  v,  c.  7. 

t  Courrier  de  PEgypte,  27  Nivose  8,  of  the  Rep. 

t  M.  du  Bois-Ayme's  Description  de  TEgypte. 


68  PERIOD    I. 

for  our  part,  do  not  believe  that  the  nature  of  that  pillar  can 
be  fully  ascertained  by  us,  standing  so  remote  from  that  age. 

According  to  our  sources,  the  Israelites  marched  day  and 
night,  which  could  have  been  for  no  other  reason  but  to  con- 
found Pharaoh.  The  manoeuvre  of  the  Israelites  had  the  desired 
effect;  when  Pharaoh  had  been  informed  that  the  Israelites 
marched  towards  the  sea,  not  crossing  the  Isthmus,  where  they 
would  have  been  within  his  grasp;  he  could  but  think,  that 
they  intended  to  return  and  unite  their  forces  with  those  of 
Amosis.  Pharaoh  thought  of  crushing  the  Israelites  at  once 
and  pursued  them  with  a  numerous  army,  in  which  chariots 
of  war  and  cavalry  made  a  principal  division.  After  a  difficult 
march  Pharaoh  overtook  the  Israelites  at  a  spot  described 
above,  which  we  do  not  think  has  been  fully  ascertained  by 
modern  travelers.  The  camp  of  the  Israelites  was  so  situated, 
that  Pharaoh  could  not  attack  them ;  for,  according  to  Josephus, 
their  right  and  their  left  was  covered  by  steep  ranges  of  moun- 
tains, while  the  sea  covered  their  rear;  the  valley  was  too 
narrow  to  have  the  chariots  or  the  cavalry  operate  to  any 
advantage;  so  Pharaoh  could  only  besiege  them.  Still,  the 
Israelites,  on  perceiving  the  Egyptian  army,  were  discouraged; 
and  gave  free  utterance  to  their  feelings,  accusing  Moses  of 
having  led  them  away  from  a  safe  home  to  certain  death. 
Moses  succeeded  in  pacifying  them  until  the  provisions  were 
gone,  as  Josephus  informs  us;  when,  of  course,  a  decisive  step 
had  to  be  taken.  The  cause  of  this  delay  may  have  been  an 
understanding  to  this  effect  with  Amosis,  or  the  expectation  of 
Moses  of  the  right  moment  to  cross  the  sea,  which,  according 
to  Scripture,  could  be  expected  only  with  the  blowing  of  a 
strong  east,  or  rather  north-east  wind. 

Much  has  been  said  about  the  crossing  of  the  Red  sea,  and 
while  the  pious  believer  of  the  Bible  perceives  in  it  a  merely 
divine  manifestation  of  the  Deity  on  behalf  of  Israel,  the 
hypercritics  of  our  days  have  altogether  denied  the  fact  on  the 
ground  of  its  being  contrary  to  the  laws  of  nature  ordained 
by  the  Deity;  we  are,  therefore,  supposed  to  be  entitled  to 
show,  that   th&re  is   a  possibility,    that  the   crossing   of   the 


CHAPTER    II.  (jD 

Red    sea    really   occurred    in    accordance    with    the     laws    of 
nature. 

Josephus  remarks  on  this  subject:  "As  for  myself,  I  have 
delivered  every  part  of  this  history  as  I  found  it  in  the  sacred 
books.  Nor  let  any  one  wonder  at  the  strangeness  of  the 
narration,  if  a  way  icere  discovered  to  those  men  of  old  time, 
who  were  free  from  the  wickedness  of  the  modern  ages, 
whether  it  happened  by  the  will  of  God,  or  whether  it  hap- 
pened of  its  own  accord;  while,  for  the  sake  of  those  who 
accompanied  Alexander,  king  of  Macedonia,  who  yet  lived 
comparatively  but  a  little  while  ago,  the  Pamphvlian  sea 
retired  and  afforded  them  a  passage  through  itself,*  when  they 
had  no  other  way  to  go;  I  mean,  when  it  was  the  will  of  God  to 
destroy  the  monarchy  of  the  Persians." 

I.  Salvador,  a  modern  French  writer,  gives  us  this  description 
of  the  affair.  "  The  Red  sea,  or  the  Sea  of  Suph,  is  a  gulf 
running  from  south  to  north  in  a  length  of  more  than  four  hun- 
dred French  miles,  from  the  13  to  30°  northern  latitude.  It 
equals  a  large  channel,  stretching  between  Arabia  in  the  east, 
Abyssinia  and  Egypt  in  the  west.  Its  western  shore  was 
inhabited  by  the  ancient  Troglodytes.  It  terminates  in  the 
north  in  two  small  arms,  which  were  always  exposed  to  the 
strongest  tides.  The  western  part  of  it  was  called  by  the  ancients, 
Sinus  Heropolites,  separated  from  the  Mediterranean  sea  by 
the  Isthmus  of  Suez,  and  the  eastern  part  they  called  Sinus 
Aelnites,  after  the  city  of  Aelana  once  situated  on  its  shores. 
Moses  had  encamped  at  the  head  of  the  western  gulf,|  in  a 
position,  which  it  is  difficult  now  to  ascertain;  because  those 
shores  have  undergone  many  changes  in  the  lapse  of  centuries. J 
The  Sinus  Heropolytes  is  at  present  but  three  to  four  miles 
wide  at  its  northern  extremity.     The  tide,  according  to  that 

*  This  is  also  narrated  by  Callisthenes,  Strabo,  Arian  and  Apian. 

t  According:  to  Robinson,  above  Suez,  where  there  are  about  three  to  four 
miles  from  shore  to  shore-,  and  where  the  Arabs  still  cross  with  their  camels. 

J  Niebuhr's  Travels.  Memoire  de  M.  du  Bois-Ayme  on  the  boundaries  of 
the  Red  Sea,  in  the  Description  of  Egypt,  Tom.  I.  Voyage  of  Aly-Bey, 
Tom.  hi,  p.  89. 


70  PERIOD    I. 

work  on  Egypt,  rises  there  two  metres  (eight  feet),  with 
storms,  especially  when  the  wind  blows  strongly  from  the 
south,  the  tide  rises  to  a  height  of  three  to  four  metres  (12 — 16 
feet),  which  is  more  than  sufficient  to  drown  a  numerous 
army.*  The  commander-in-chief  of  that  Egyptian  expedition, 
(Napoleon)  returning  one  day  from  the  Fountains  of  Moses, 
which  are  on  the  eastern  shore  of  the  gulf,  thought  of  making 
use  of  the  ebb  tide  to  cross  the  Red  sea  on  dry  ground ;  but 
night  came  on,  he  had  lost  his  way,  the  flood  tide  came  against 
him,  and  he  scarcely  found  time  enough  to  escape  the  rage  of 
the  waves.j  Moses  who  had  become  intimately  acquainted, 
during  his  stay  in  Arabia,  with  the  phenomena  and  vicinity  of 
the  Red  sea,  ordered  at  even  time  the  fire,  which  was  at  the 
head  of  the  camp,  to  be  brought  behind  between  the  camps  of 
the  Israelites  and  the  Egyptians;  either,  in  order  to  cover  the 
movements  of  his  camp  by  a  thick  smoke,  or  to  let  the  Egyptians 
see  the  stationary  rear  of  it,  while  the  march  was  continued  in 
the  front.  When  the  tide  and  a  strong  wind  had  driven  back 
the  water,  a  remarkable  phenomenon  became  visible,  which 
accounts  more  satisfactorily  for  the  following  facts,  than  the 
natural  exposition  of  the  affair  given  by  Josephus,  and  adopted 
by|St.  Thomas,  Grotius,  and  many  of  the  learned  rabbins,  that 
the  Israelites  marched  in  a  semi-circular  line  through  the  sea 
during  the  ebb  tide,  returning  to  the  land  on  the  same  shore 
from  which  they  started.  There  became  visible  in  the  bottom 
of  the  sea  a  considerable  elevation  of  the  bottom  running  across 
the  gulf  from  shore  to  shore,  which  divided  the  water  in  two 
parts;  the  part  north  of  the  elevation  formed  a  separate  sea, 
while  in  the  south  of  it  was  t*he  main  body  of  the  water,  and 
between  them  the  broad  elevation  of  the  bottom.  This  fact, 
which  is  readily  understood,  and  which  is  confirmed  by  M.  du 


*  Description  de  l'Egypte,  Tom.  i,  p.  34,  Niebuhr  remarks,  that  the  sea 
above  Suez  has  but  the  breadth  of  a  river.  Description  of  Arabia,  p.  410, 
Herodotus  already  knew,  that  this  sea  daily  retires  and  returns  again;  lib.  iii, 
$  2,  and  Diodor.  added  to  this,  that  it  has  long  islands,  small  navigable  roads, 
and  a  strong  tide,  lib.  iii. 

7  Du  Bois-Aynn ,  ibid.  Memorial  du  St.  Helena,  Tom.  i. 


CHAPTER    II.  71 

Bois-Ayme,  through  observations  made  at  the  very  spot,*  is 
literally  contained  in  the  historical  part  of  the  biblical  text; 
one  must  only  guard  against  the  common  mistake  of  taking  the 
next  following  poetical  chapter  for  a  description  of  facts.  It 
says  there,  "  And  Moses  stretched  out  his  hand  over  the  sea; 
and  the  Lord  drove  the  sea  with  a  strong  east  wind  all  that 
night,  and  made  the  sea  dry  land,  and  the  zvaters  ivcre  divided." 
On  this  elevation  of  the  bottom  of  the  sea,  the  different  divi- 
sions of  the  Israclitish  host  crossed  the  sea,  extending  their 
front  continually  as  the  elevation  gained  in  breadth.  They 
progressed,  having  the  water  at  their  right  and  their  left  hand 
side,  appearing  to  them  in  the  light  of  the  moon,  "  as  a  wall;" 
at  the  left  they  were  covered  by  a  sea  separated  from  the  main 
body  of  the  water  by  the  elevation,  on  which  they  marched; 
while  their  right  wing  w^as  covered  by  the  main  body  of  water. 
So  they  continued  their  march  until  their  rear  had  come  into 
the  sea,  when  the  Egyptians  observing  that  peculiar  road  and 
the  march  of  the  Israelites,  pursued  them,  blinded  by  vengeance. 
The  Israelites,  whose  main  body  had  meanwhile  reached  the 
opposite  shore,  could  draw  up  in  battle  line  to  protect  their 
rear,  and  to  prevent  the  enemy  from  reaching  the  shore.  But 
this  caution  was  unnecessary.  The  darkness  of  a  stormy  night, 
the  illusion  of  the  dim  light  of  the  moon,  their  ignorance  of  the 
nature  of  that  road,  and  especially  their  heavy  chariots,  the 
wheels  of  which  cut  deep  into  the  sandy  ground,  considerably 
checked  their  progress.  Suddenly  the  roar  of  the  rushing 
waves  struck  on  their  cars,  which  returned  with  the  more  vio- 
lent a  force  the  more  they  had  been  driven  back  by  the  previous 
storm;  and  the  general  outcry  was  raised,  "  Let  us  flee  from 
the  face  of  Israel,  for  the  Lord  fighteth  for  them  against  the 
Egyptians."  But  where  could  they  flee?  At  their  left  was 
the  sea  described  before,  hemming  them  in  as  a  wall;  the  shores 
were  too  far  distant,  and  the  roar  of  the  rushing  waves  con- 
tinually increased.  The  confusion  of  the  Egyptians,  upon  the 
dawn  of  morning  through  a  dim  light,  must  have  been  horrible. 

*  Description  of  Egypt  ami  the  limits  of  the  Red  sea,  I  e. 


72  PERIOD    I. 

The  terrors  of  death  followed  the  passion  of  vengeance;  their 
senses  became  confused,  and  the  returning  tide  overtook  them, 
floating  them  along  on  its  thunderlike  currents,  together  with 
horses,  chariots  and  baggage."  But  on  the  opposite  shore,  a 
sublime  hymn  resounded,  the  people  rendering  praise  to  Jeho- 
vah for  this  wonderful  salvation ;  the  accords  of  the  multitude 
shouting  for  joy,  accompanied  by  the  sound  of  the  drum, 
cymbal  and  sistrum  by  Miriam  and  the  other  women,  who 
repeated  the  concluding  verse  of  the  hymn — filled  the  air  of  the 
desert.  Here  they  were  joined  by  their  brethren,  who  partly 
had  worked  here  in  the  quarries,  and  partly  had  fed  here  their 
numerous  flocks.  Israel  was  saved  (1485  B.C.),  and  the  Hyksos 
were  beaten,  driven  from  Egypt  with  very  little  trouble;  where- 
fore the  founder  of  the  eighteenth  dynasty  was  called  Amosis, 
in  honor  of  Moses,  by  the  agency  of  whom  Egypt  was  saved 
from  foreign  tyrants.  So  a  nation  was  born;  so  Israel  was 
redeemed  from  Egypt  to  continue  the  mission  of  the  patriarchs; 
to  play  the  part  in  history,  which  Providence  has  entrusted 
into  its  hands,  and  to  begin  a  grand,  marvelous  and  eventful 
career  as  a  nation. 


CHAPTER  III. 

ISRAEL  IN  THE  WILDERNESS.     (1485-1445^  B.  C.) 

The  people  which  Moses  brought  from  Egypt  were  not,  as 
some  erroneously  supposed,  a  host  of  demoralized  slaves,  who 
were  debarred  from  all  sorts  of  knowledge  and  civilization; 
for  such  a  people  could  not  have  been  subjected  to  the  organiza- 
tion that  Moses  effected,  nor  would  they  have  accepted  laws 
and  a  religion  so  intelligent  as  those  contained  in  the  Mosaic 
dispensation.      There  were  amongst  them   a  vast  number  of 


CHAPTER    III.  73 

slaves,  who  had  lived  for  a  long  time,  and  a  vast  number  of 
whom  had  been  born  under  the  degradations  of  perpetual 
slavery;  but  the  bulk  of  the  people  lived  in  Goshen,  although 
under  the  despotic  rule  of  the  Hyksos,  still  they  were  personally 
free,  and  were  occupied  with  agriculture  and  the  kindred  arts. 
We  will  find  among  them  in  the  course  of  this  period  artists  in 
different  branches  of  the  useful  and  of  the  fine  arts ;  a  caste 
of  warriors,  non^D  ^J«  who  came  with  them  out  of  Egypt; 
a  political  organization  into  tribes  with  official  chiefs,  as 
Jacob  had  ordered  it,  and  the  tribes  subdivided  into  families 
with  chiefs  of  the  families,  which  were  again  subdivided  into 
fatherhouses  with  official  chiefs,  besides  which,  we  find  among 
them  in  Egypt  a  council  of  the  elders,  consequently,  they  must 
have  been  an  organized  and  civilized  nation  in  Goshen,  de- 
pending on  the  Hyksos  kings  then  the  rulers  of  Egypt.  Many 
of  them  were  addicted  to  the  pastoral  life,  especially  the 
Reubenites,  Gadites,  and  one  half  of  the  tribe  of  Menassah, 
who  most  likely  occupied  the  oases  of  Arabia  Petrsea,  previous 
to  the  exode.  We  have  set  down  here  this  observation  in  order 
to  prevent  misunderstanding,  when  we  shall  afterwards  speak 
of  different  classes  of  people  among  the  Israelites. 

Josephus  informs  us,  that  the  next  day  after  they  had 
crossed  the  Red  sea,  "Moses  gathered  together  the  arms  of 
the  Egyptians,  which  were  brought  to  the  camp  of  the  Hebrews 
by  the  current  of  the  sea,  and  the  force  of  wind  assisting  it." 
Soon  after — it  is  not  remarked  how  long  they  stayed  there — the 
whole  host  marched  in  a  southern  direction  at  a  short  distance 
from  the  sea.  It  was  necessary  for  Moses  to  go  as  far  away 
from  the  Isthmus  of  Suez  as  possible,  in  order  to  escape 
molestation  by  the  tribes  connected  with  the  Anakims;  until 
he  had  trained  his  men,  and  organized  the  nation  as  he  wanted 
it.  The  pursuit  of  Amalek,  a  cognate  tribe  of  the  Anakims 
(Genesis  xiv,  7),  which  we  shall  directly  notice  more  at  length, 
shows  that  this  caution  was  very  prudent. 

Most  all  the  readers  of  the  Bible  form  a  peculiar  conception 
of  the  wilderness,  thinking  it  to  be  a  vast  and  barren  plain 
covered  with  sand  and  serpents,  in  which  no  other  living  being 


74  PERIOD    1. 

breathes;  but  this  is  by  no  means  the  case,  there  are  man}' 
large  and  fertile  oases,  which  afford  pasture  to  the  numerous 
herds  of  the  Arabs;  there  are  in  Arabia  Petnea  many  a  fertile  val- 
ley, as  the  Ghurundel  and  the  Taiyibch  valleys,  and  thousands 
of  Arabs  still  find  there  a  tolerable  support.  The  Hebrew 
term  "»m  denotes  a  place  of  pasture  and  also  a  desert.  If  the 
wilderness  between  the  two  gulfs  of  the  Red  sea  has  lost  its 
vegetative  powers  in  the  same  ratio  as  Palestine,  then  it  was 
much  more  fertile  in  the  time  of  Moses  than  at  present,  of 
which  there  are  indeed  some  unquestionable  traces ;  the  petrified 
trees  which  are  found  in  many  regions  of  that  desert,  especially 
in  the  vicinity  of  Suez ,  are  a  plain  evidence  of  a  former  vege- 
tation in  that  desert.  The  Bible  mentions  palm  trees,  and 
Josephus  makes  mention  of  groves  of  palm  trees  in  that  wil- 
derness. The  numerous  live  stock  which  the  Israelites  had 
with  them,  is  another  proof  of  its  fertility;  for  they  never 
complained  about  the  want  of  pasture.  It  appears,  that  the 
gazelles,  which  now  traverse  the  Syrian  desert  in  droves  of  two 
to  three  thousand,  formerly  roamed  also  over  this  desert,  as 
well  as  the  hart  and  the  roe,  which  undoubtedly  existed  there 
in  the  time  of  Moses,  together  with  many  different  wild  birds.* 
In  the  time  of  David,  and  especially  in  the  time  of  king 
Uziah,  that  desert  was  regarded  as  a  valuable  possession,  upon 
which  much  care  was  bestowed;  men  and  money  were  sacrificed 
for  it.  We  can  not  imagine,  that  Moses  should  have  led  a  people 
into  a  desert,  if  he  had  not  carefully  surveyed  it  before,  and 
had  known  that  they  could  find  there  their  support;  it  appears 
to  us  much  more  agreeable  to  the  wisdom  and  humanity  of 
Moses,  that  he  had  fixed  upon  every  point  of  encampment 
and  had  carefully  considered  every  possible  occurrence  before 
he  took  it  upon  himself  to  lead  two  millions  of  human  beings 
into  a  howling  desert. 

After  the  Israelites  had  traversed  for  three  days  the  wilder- 
ness of  Shur,  the  common  dilemma  of  the  want  of  water,  that 
curse  of  the  wilderness,  was  experienced  by  them;  and  when 
they  finally  found  a  stream  of  water,  it  was  bitter,  as  numerous 

*  Leviticus  xvii,  1H-,   Deutrononiy  xii.  22. 


CHAPTER    III.  75 

fountains  of  bitter  water  arc  found  in  those  deserts  in  our  day. 
The  water,  spoken  of  here,  most  likely  was  in  the  vicinity  of 
the  torrent  of  Sdur,  where  yet. in  our  day  wells  of  salt  water 
arc  found.  Moses,  better  informed  than  the  Arabs  of  our  day, 
threw  a  certain  kind  of  wood  into  the  water  which  rendered 
it  drinkable.  Perhaps,  he  threw  many  pieces  of  wood  in  to 
form  a  natural  reservoir  to  purify  the  water.  According  to 
Josephus,  the  water  was  bitter  because  it  had  stood  so  long; 
Moses  "  bid  the  strongest  men  among  them  that  stood  there, 
to  draw  up  water;  and  told  them,  that  when  the  greatest  part 
was  drawn  up,  the  remainder  would  be  fit  to  drink;  so  they 
labored  at  it  till  the  water  was  so  agitated  and  purged  as  to 
be  fit  to  drink."  According  to  Buckhardt's  observation,  it  must 
have  been  the  berries  of  the  shrub  growing  at  the  salt  wells, 
which  made  the  water  drinkable ;  but  our  text  speaks  of  a 
wood.  That  place  was  called  Marah  (bitter).  Moses  embraced 
that  opportunity  to  exhort  the  people  to  trust  in  God,  and  not 
to  be  discouraged  by  the  terrors  which  accompany  a  journey 
through  a  wilderness.  While  they  remained  at  Marah,  Moses 
gave  them  such  laws  and  regulations  as  were  necessary  for  a 
marching  host. 

The  next  encampment  was  at  Elim  in  the  fertile  Valley  of 
Ghurundel,  where  they  found  twelve  fountains  of  water  and 
seventy  palm  trees ;  according  to  Josephus,  a  grove  of  palms, 
where  they  rested  for  some  time.  No  stopping  place  is  then 
noticed  until  they  came  to  the  Wilderness  of  Sin,  about  sixteen 
miles  from  the  former  place;  still  they  must  have  been 
encamped  in  the  Valley  of  Taiyibeh,  where  the  beautiful  Lake 
Murcah,  most  likely  the  encampment  on  the  sea,  invited  them 
to  a  day  of  rest,  and  sixteen  miles  was  too  much  for  a  day's 
march  for  such  a  large  body,  and  they  reached  the  Wilderness 
of  Sin,  Plain  of  el  Ca'a,  not  before  the  fifteenth  day  of  the 
second  month  after  the  exode.  The  want  of  provisions  was 
felt,  and  the  murmuring  was  heard  against  Moses,  "  Would  to 
God  we  had  died  by  the  hand  of  God  in  the  land  of  Egypt, 
when  we  sat  by  the  ilesh-pots,  and  when  we  did  eat  bread  to 
the    full;    rather  than   that   vou   have    led  us   forth   into   this 


76  PERIOD    I. 

wilderness,  to  kill  this  whole  assembly  with  hunger."  The 
words  of  themselves  prove  sufficiently  that  it  was  but  that  part 
of  the  people  who  were  degraded  by  a  lasting  and  severe 
slavery,  although  Ave  do  not  know  what  sort  of  words  we 
might  use  under  similar  circumstances.  Moses  satisfied  them 
by  promising  them  in  the  name  of  God,  that  they  should  have 
plenty  of  meat  in  the  evening  and  of  bread  in  the  morning. 
Jn  the  evening  a  vast  number  of  quails  came  flying  over  the 
sea,  flying  very  near  the  earth  as  usual;  the  Israelites  caught 
them  and  satisfied  their  hunger  with  them.  Josephus  remarks, 
that  this  bird  is  more  plentiful  in  that  region  of  the  Arabian 
gulf  than  anywhere  else.  It  is  also  well  known,  that  the  quails 
still  cross  the  gulf  in  our  very  day,  and  wearied  by  a  long 
flight  can  be  easily  caught  with  the  hands,  and  many  Arabs 
still  subsist  on  this  easy  sport. 

In  the  morning  they  found  small  grains,  which  tasted  sweet 
as  dipped  in  honey;  they  tasted  it,  and  not  knowing  what  it 
was,  they  called  it  manna,  derived  from  man  hu,  "what  is 
this?  "  of  which  Josephus  says,  that  it  came  down  in  rain  in  all 
those  places  in  his  very  day.  Prosper  Alpin  tells  us,*  that  the 
monks  of  Mount  Sinai  gathered  manna  in  the  vicinity  of  their 
convent,  to  give  it  to  the  ambassador  of  Algiers.  Modern 
travelers  confirm  this  statement.  It  is  generally  supposed, 
that  this  accounts  not  for  the  miracle,  as  the  quantity  of 
manna  must  have  been  immense,  to  feed  nearly  two  millions 
of  people;  but  it  is  generally  forgotten,  that  they  subsisted 
also  on  quails,  that  they  had  a  vast  wealth  of  live  stock;  that 
the  numerous  oases  and  fertile  valleys  are  not  only  covered 
with  wells  and  pasture,  but  also  with  fruit  trees;  that  cara- 
vans came  to  them  and  brought  them  the  products  of  other 
countries;  and  that  they  also  subsisted  on  hunting  (Levit. 
xvii,  13).  The  manna  was  but  one  of  their  means  of  subsist- 
ence. Moses  commanded  them  to  gather  manna  every  morn- 
ing, sabbaths  excepted,  as  that  should  be  a  day  of  rest.  But 
those  who  were  slaves   in  Eg}rpt,  and  not  permitted  to  have  a 

*  De  medicina  Egyptionorum,   lib.  ii,  c.  v. 


CHAPTER    III.  77 

day  of  rest,  although  the  Egyptians  observed  the  sabbath, 
disobeyed  that  command,  upon  which  Moses  exhorted  them  to 
pay  more  regard  to  the  Lord's  day.  He  also  commanded  Aaron 
to  take  a  part  of  it  and  lay  it  up  for  a  memorial,  that  the 
Israelites  were  fed  by  the  Lord  when  they  were  in  the  wilder- 
ness, which,  however,  was  done  long  after  this.  From  Sin, 
where  they  ate  the  first  manna,  they  traveled  to  Rephidim, 
Valley  of  Sheikh,  resting  at  three  intermediate  places,  where 
again  the  want  of  water  thus  provoked  them,  that  a  riot  broke 
out  against  Moses,  threatening  to  stone  him  to  death  if  they 
were  not  supplied  with  water.  Moses,  probably  either  knowing 
that  there  was  a  well  of  water  in  a  rock,  or  digging  one  with 
the  aid  of  his  friends,  and  covering  it  with  a  large  stone  which 
was  thin  enough  to  be  split  by  a  forcible  blow  with  a  stick, 
produced  by  the  command  of  God  plenty  of  water  from  a  rock, 
as  our  sources  inform  us.  This  place  was  called  Masah 
Umeribah;  but  the  Arabs  call  it  Macad-Sidna-Mousa,  place  of 
our  lord  Moses. 

The  Amalekites  frequently  attacked  the  rear  of  the  camp 
when  either  marching  or  resting.  While  in  Rephidim  Moses 
commanded  Joshua  to  select  the  best  men,  those  who  served  in 
the  Egyptian  army,  and  chastise  Amalek,  which  was  done  with 
the  best  consequences.  Moses  having  the  chief  command, 
assisted  by  Aaron  and  Hur,  stood  on  a  hill  and  directed  the 
battle.  Amalek  was  utterly  discomfited;  upon  which  Moses 
built  an  altar,  calling  it  "God  is  my  banner,"  and  swore,  that 
this  cognate  tribe  of  the  Anakims  should  be  utterly  exterminated. 

Departing  from  Rephidim,  they  came  in  the  beginning  of  the 
third  month  after  the  exode,  into  the  wilderness,  or  rather 
mountains  of  Sinai.  Moses  had  led  the  people  almost  to  the 
extremity  of  the  desert,  so  that  they  should  be  undisturbed; 
for  this  was  the  spot  where  he  thought  of  preparing  them  for 
the  mission  to  which  Abraham  had  devoted  his  tribe,  and  to 
organize  them  to  the  great  work  of  taking  Canaan  and  con- 
stituting a  free  and  independent  nation.  Here  he  disclosed  to 
them  his  lofty  plans,  making  them  acquainted  with  the  eternal 
will  of  God,  and  the  part  which  they  should  enact  in  the  history 


78  PERIOD    I. 

of  mankind.  In  the  Bible  we  are  told,  that  he  addressed  to 
them  these  words  by  the  command  of  God,  "  Ye  have  seen 
what  I  have  done  unto  the  Egyptians,  and  how  I  bare  you  on 
eagles'  wings,  and  brought  you  unto  myself.  Now,  therefore, 
if  you  will  obey  my  voice,  and  keep  my  covenant,  then  shall 
ye  be  unto  me  a  peculiar  treasure  above  all  nations ;  for  all  the 
earth  is  mine.  And  ye  shall  be  unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests, 
and  a  holy  nation  "  (Exodus  xix,  4-6).  But  if  we  compare 
this  statement  with  that  in  Exodus  xxiv,  1-11,  and  with  the 
words  of  Josephus  (Antiqu.  B.  iii,  c.  v,  3),  it  becomes  evident, 
that  the  verses  quoted  are  but  a  very  brief  statement  of  the 
quintessence  of  what  Moses  spoke  to  the  people.  He  read  to 
them  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  (Exodus  xxiv,  7),  and  this  was 
according  to  ancient  traditions,  with  which  not  only  Josephus 
but  sound  common  sense  agree,  the  Book  of  Genesis,  the 
history  of  creation,  of  the  deluge,  of  the  patriarchs,  and  their 
pious  designs,  to  which  he  may  have  added  a  brief  review  of 
the  history  of  their  sufferings  in  Egypt,  and  their  wonderful 
delivery  from  bondage,  and  into  which  afterwards  the  ten 
commandments  were  written.  He  expounded  to  them  the 
great  mission,  which  they  were  to  take  upon  themselves,  and 
for  which  Abraham  left  his  home  to  constitute  an  independent 
tribe,  which  he  told  them  consisted  in  being  exalted  in  moral 
sentiments  above  the  rest  of  nations ;  being  a  kingdom  of  priests, 
every  one  of  which  should  be  the  servant  of  the  Lord,  and 
bound  to  practice  and  to  teach  his  divine  will,  not  as  in  Egypt 
where  this  duty  devolved  upon  one  caste.  Every  one  of 
them  should  be  as  free  and  esteemed  as  the  Egyptian  priests 
were;  and  a  holy  nation  by  practice,  by  the  purpose  to  which 
they  should  be  subservient,  and  by  being  separated  from  the 
rest  of  mankind  to  the  service  of  the  Lord,  while  others  wor- 
ship idols.  The  people,  inspired  by  the  history  of  their  ancestors 
on  one  side,  and  by  the  great  and  divine  mission  on  the  other, 
unanimously  exclaimed,  "Whatever  the  Lord  will  say,  we 
shall  do  and  obey."  Moses  erected  an  altar  of  twelve  stones, 
according  to  the  number  of  the  tribes  of  Israel;  he  called  the 
first  born  sons,  who,  according  to  patriarchal  custom,  were  the 


CHAPTER    III.  79 

priests  of  the  nation,  and  ordered  them  to  bring  sacrifices, 
the  blood  of  which  lie  sprinkled  upon  the  altar  and  upon  the 
nation,  as  a  token  of  the  renewed  covenant  between  God  and 
the  sons  of  Abraham;  thus  dedicating  the  nation  to  its  great 
mission.  He  then  constituted  a  legislative  body,  consisting  of 
seventy  of  the  elders  of  Israel,  in  whose  company,  together 
with  Aaron  and  his  two  sons,  Nadab  and  Abihu,  he  retired  to 
the  mountain  in  order  to  have  a  solitary  place  for  calm  and 
considerate  deliberation ;  while  the  nation  celebrated  the  feast 
of  the  covenant,  and  prepared  themselves  to  receive  the 
fundamental  laws,  being,  as  it  were,  the  compact  between  God 
and  Israel,  between  the  king  and  his  people.  Meanwhile,  Moses 
and  his  legislative  body  deliberated  on  the  mountain,  and  pre- 
pared the  first  constitution  ever  given  to  a  nation;  an  instrument 
which  has  outlasted  thirty-three  centuries ;  which  has  become 
the  original  compact  of  civilized  society;  every  word  of  which 
still  testifies  its  divine  origin. 

"  And  they  saw  the  Deity  of  Israel;  and  there  was  under 
his  feet,  as  it  were,  a  paved  work  of  brilliant  sapphire,  and,  as 
it  were,  the  color  of  heaven  in  its  clearness."  It  was  truth, 
clear  as  the  color  of  sky,  beautiful  as  the  brilliant  sapphire, 
and  immutable  as  the  Deity.  Moses,  on  command  of  God,  laid 
the  ten  commandments  first  before  the  seventy  elders  of  Israel, 
who  unanimously  approved  of  it  (Exodus  xix,  7,  8). 

The  sixth  day  of  the  third  month  was  set  apart  for  the 
proclamation  of  the  constitution  of  the  covenant  by  God  him- 
self. And  when  the  morning  dawned,  "  There  were  thunders 
and  lightnings,  and  a  heavy  cloud  was  upon  the  mount,  and  the 
voice  of  the  trumpet  was  exceedingly  loud;  so  that  all  the 
people,  that  were  in  the  camp,  trembled."  Moses,  who  had 
come  down  again,  led  the  people  out  of  the  camp  towards  the 
smoking  mount,  which  was  fenced  in,  so  that  no  uninitiated  per- 
son should  ascend  it;  and  after  he  had  charged  them  again  under 
the  penalty  of  death  not  to  ascend  the  mountain,  he  and  Aaron 
went  up;  and  a  large  flame  of  fire  descended  upon  the  mount, 
the  thunder,  the  lightning,  and  the  voice  of  the  trumpet 
increased.     Moses  stood  between  the  Lord  and  the  people  to 


80  PERIOD    I. 

interpret  to  them  the  words  of  God;  for  they  were  afraid  of 
the  lire  (Deutr.  v,  5).  "And  they  said  unto  Moses,  speak  thou 
with  us,  and  we  will  hear;  but  let  not  God  speak  with  us,  lest 
we  die." 

So  the  Bible  describes  the  scene  and  the  circumstances  under 
which  the  ten  commandments,  the  constitution  of  the  covenant, 
were  proclaimed  by  the  Almighty.  We  must  let  theologians 
dispute  about  the  nature  of  the  revelation,  whether  all  this 
was  natural  or  supernatural;  whether  God  spoke  the  whole  of 
the  ten  commandments  in  the  presence  of  all  the  people,  who 
heard  and  understood  every  word;  or  whether  they  only  heard 
the  first  three  commandments  directly  from  God  himself,  as 
some  of  the  ancient  rabbins  thought;  or  whether  the  people 
heard  but  a  voice  from  the  midst  of  the  fire,  thunder,  lightning, 
and  the  sound  of  the  trumpet,  which  they  did  not  understand, 
and  which  Moses  interpreted  to  them,  as  others  of  the  ancient 
rabbins  asserted,  and  which  is  not  only  most  agreeable  to 
the  words  of  the  sacred  text,  but  also  to  human  reason:  the 
historian  is  satisfied  with  the  words  which  were  revealed, 
leaving  the  accompanying  circumstances  to  the  learned  theo- 
logians. The  words  revealed  stand  not  in  need  of  the  testimony 
of  external  manifestations;  they  speak  for  themselves;  the 
evidence  of  their  divine  origin  is  closely  interwoven  with 
themselves.  They  are  internally  the  basis  of  civilization,  the 
moral  code  of  mankind. 

The  ten  commandments  are  the  germs  of  the  Mosaic  dis- 
pensation. It  is  first  commanded  that  they  shall  worship  but 
One  God,  who  is  the  immutable  essence  of  all  substances.  He 
is,  what  there  is,  what  there  was,  and  what  there  will  be — 
Jehovah.  He  is  their  Elohim,  their  national  Deity,  although 
he  is  the  God  of  the  universe;  and,  therefore,  they  shall  have 
no  national  deity  besides  him.  He  is  their  king,  for  he  has 
redeemed  them  from  the  Egyptian  bondage  to  be  his  people ; 
every  Israelite  is  his  servant,  wherefore  he  can  not  be  sold  into 
perpetual  slavery,  being  owned  by  God.  As  God  is  the 
immutable  essence  of  all  substances,  he  has  no  corporeal 
form;  and,  therefore,  they  were  commanded,   secondly,  not  to 


CHAPTER    III.  81 

make  an  image  of  him :  not  to  compare  him  with  the  luminaries 
of  heaven,  or  with  the  things  of  the  sublunar  world,  and  not  to 
make  images  of  those  comparisons,  as  the  Egyptians  and  other 
nations  did;  if  another  made  such  images,  they  should  not 
bow  down  unto  them,  nor  worship  them;  as  this  would  bring 
upon  them  the  absurd  and  horrid  consequences  of  idolatry, 
which  degraded  and  demoralized  other  nations ;  and  which 
transmitted  corruption  from  generation  to  generation.  As 
God  is  not  only  the  king  and  national  Deity,  but  also  the 
creator,  governor  and  preserver  of  the  universe,  they  wvro 
commanded,  thirdly,  not  to  take  his  name  in  vain;  not  to  swear 
to  a  falsehood  by  the  name  of  God;  not  to  use  his  name  for 
divination  or  sorcery;  not  to  call  him  by  the  names  of  idols; 
and  not  to  associate  his  name  with  immoral  or  profane  pur- 
poses; because  they  owed  him  obedience,  respect  and  adoration. 

So  far  are  the  laws  respecting  God,  the  king  of  Israel;  or  the 
duties  of  an  Israelite  towards  God.  As  regards  the  individual, 
to  whom  personal  liberty  was  secured,  it  was  ordained  in  the 
fourth  commandment,  to  have  the  seventh  day  set  apart  for 
sacred  purposes,  while  the  other  six  days  were  appointed  for 
useful  labor;  in  order  that  man  should  discharge  his  duties 
towards  himself,  and  towards  his  fellow-creature,  he  must  take 
proper  care  for  his  spiritual  and  physical  welfare.  But,  as 
every  human  being  is  obliged  by  the  eternal  laws  to  discharge 
these  duties,  this  command  also  enjoined  upon  them  not  to 
imitate  Egyptian  cruelty,  but  to  permit  also  the  lowest  of  their 
servants  to  rest  on  the  seventh  day;  and  since  also  the 
animal  is  a  creature  of  God,  it  also  should  be  given  a  day  of 
rest. 

As  regards  society,  which  consists  of  families,  the  supreme 
authority  of  each  of  which  is  father  and  mother,  who  are 
responsible  to  society  for  the  actions  of  the  members  of  their 
respective  family,  according  to  patriarchal  custom;  the  fifth 
commandment  was  ordained,  to  honor  father  and  mother,  that 
is,  to  obey  them  with  love  and  gratitude.  If  only  such  well- 
governed  families  composed  a  commonwealth,  public  peace  and 
prosperity  would  be  secured;  provided,  father  and  mother  were 
6 


82  PERIOD  I. 

obedient  to  the  law.  What  is  next  necessary  in  civilized 
society  is  security  of  life  and  limbs ;  the  sanctity  of  the  matri- 
monial institute  and  female  chastity,  which  was  valued  next  to 
life ;  security  of  property,  and  a  high  respect  to  truth,  which 
was  commanded  in  the  sixth,  seventh,  eighth  and  ninth  com- 
mandments. But  the  law  should  not  be  a  mere  external 
command  or  prohibition ;  it  should  be  a  religious  duty  proceed- 
ing from  an  improved  heart,  wherefore  it  was  commanded, 
tenth,  and  lastly,  for  a  man  not  to  covet  what  belongs  to  his 
neighbor.  God  is  the  efficient  cause  and  the  human  heart  the 
final  cause  of  the  law,  wherefore  God  stands  at  the  head  of 
the  decalogue,  and  the  human  heart  at  the  end  of  it. 

History  is  a  regular  succession  of  causes  and  effects ;  no  leaps 
are  visible  anywhere  in  its  extensive  province.  The  ten  com- 
mandments are  an  unequalled  master-piece ;  still  they  did  not  leap 
into  existence;  they  are  the  quintessence  of  the  principles  of 
the  patriarchs.  The  ancient  rabbins  state,  that  Abraham  knew 
and  practiced  the  whole  of  the  law ;  and  that  the  sons  of  Noah 
had  the  following  seven  commandments :  not  to  worship  idols ; 
not  to  blaspheme  the  Lord;  not  to  commit  homicide  or  suicide; 
not  to  commit  incest;  not  to  steal;  and  to  dispense  justice.* 
History  lying  before  us  proves  this  assertion  to  be  true.  Com- 
pare the  first  commandment  with,  "  I  am  the  Lord  who  brought 
thee  out  from  Ur  of  the  Chaldees,  to  give  unto  thee  this  land 
to  possess  it"  (Genesis  xvi,  7);  "There  appeared  the  Lord 
unto  Abraham,  and  he  said  unto  him,  I  am  the  Almighty  God, 
walk  thou  before  me,  and  be  thou  perfect "  (ibidxvii,  1).  Com- 
pare the  second  commandment  with,  "And  Jacob  said  to  those 
of  his  house,  Remove  the  strange  gods  which  are  amongst  you;" 
"  And  they  gave  unto  Jacob  all  the  strange  gods;"  "And  Jacob 
hid  them  "  (ibid  xxxv,  2,  4). 

These,  and  many  other  passages,  prove  that  the  first  two 
commandments  were  known  to  the  patriarchs,  and  observed  by 
them.  The  third  is  but  a  logical  consequence  of  the  two 
former  ones.     In  as  far  as  the  sacredness  of  the  oath  is  con- 

*  Maimonides  Melachim  IX,  1. 


CHAPTER   III.  88 

cerned,  many  evidences  can  be  produced,  that  it  existed  in  an 
eminent  degree  among  the  patriarchs;  we  only  refer  to  the 
passages,  Genesisxxi,  22-34;  xxiv,  3,  9;  xxv,  33;  xxvi,  26-33.; 
xxxi.  53.  The  fourth  commandment  announces  itself  as  an 
ancient  one,  "Remember  the  Sabbath  day  to  keep  it  holy;" 
it  could  be  remembered  only  if  existing  previously,  which  is 
also  proved  by  the  definite  article  (rdBfil)  in  the  original ;  the 
conclusion  of  the  commandment  speaks  of  its  venerable  anti- 
quity. To  honor  father  and  mother  was  thus  an  indispensable 
law  among  the  patriarchs;  that  even  Esau,  the  rude  warrior, 
manifested  an  unlimited  respect  towards  his  parents ;  that  Isaac 
submitted  to  his  father  to  be  sacrificed;  and  that  none  of  the 
sons  of  Jacob  had  courage  to  take  Benjamin  down  to  Egypt, 
without  the  special  permission  of  the  father.  Compare  the 
sixth  commandment  with  "  And  he  said,  Let  us  not  kill  a  per- 
son." "And  Reuben  said  unto  them,  Shed  not  blood"  (ibid 
xxxvii,  21,  22);  hence  the  story  of  Shechem  (ibid  xxxiv),  and 
the  severe  rebuke  of  Jacob  for  this  horrid  cruelty,  when  blessing 
his  sons  (ibidxli,  5-7).  As  regards  the  seventh  commandment, 
we  see  in  the  act  of  Abraham  calling  Sarah  his  sister,  and  Isaac 
calling  Rebeccah  his  sister  (ibid  xii,  10-20;  xx,  1-14;  xxvi. 
6-10),  that  the  violation  of  the  matrimonial  ties  was  con- 
sidered, even  by  Egyptians  and  Phelistines,  a  crime  worse  than 
homicide.  Besides  this,  we  read  of  the  indignation  of  the  sons 
of  Jacob,  when  their  sister  was  dishonored  (ibid  xxxiv,  7,  31); 
of  the  severe  judgment  which  Jehudah  passed  on  Thamar,  his 
daughter-in-law  (ibid  xxxviii,  24);  of  the  severe  rebuke  of 
Jacob  to  Reuben  for  a  similar  crime  (ibid  xlix,  4) ;  and  of  the 
words  and  conduct  of  Joseph  opposite  the  wife  of  Potiphar 
(ibid  xxxix,  7-12).  The  thirty-first  chapter  of  Genesis,  where 
Laban  charges  Jacob  of  the  crime  of  theft,  shows  us  in  what 
light  this  crime  was  then  considered.  The  indignation  of  Jacob 
is  so  great  that  the  crime  he  was  charged  with  must  have  been 
considered  by  him  a  capital  one.  Besides  this,  we  can  see 
plainly  enough  in  the  story,  when  the  cup  of  Joseph  was  found 
in  the  sack  of  Benjamin  (ibid  xxxiv),  that  theft  was  considered 
a  crime.     The  ninth  commandment  implies  the  sacredness  of 


84  PERIOD    I. 

truth,  and  of  promise,  which  was  sacred  even  to  Ephron, 
selling  a  piece  of  land  to  Abraham  (Genesis  ii,  3),  for  which 
Abraham  had  no  other  pledge  than  the  word  of  Ephron;  and  to 
Jacob,  who  had  given  to  Laban  no  other  pledge  but  his  word, 
to  serve  him  seven  years  more  for  Rachel  (ibid  xxix,  27-29); 
and  to  Jehudah,  who  had  pledged  but  his  word  to  his  father  for 
Benjamin  (ibid  xliii,  8-10),  and  when  his  daughter-in-law  sent 
him  the  tokens,  he  confessed  the  truth,  "  She  is  juster  than 
myself"  (ibid  xxxviii,  25,  26).  The  tenth  commandment  was 
practically  taught  by  Abraham;  when  he  returned  from  the 
war  against  the  four  kings ;  the  king  of  Sedom  offered  him  the 
substances  and  demanded  but  the  persons,  which  Abraham 
nobly  rejected,  claiming  nothing  for  himself  (ibid  xiv,  22-24); 
and  bj-  Joseph,  who  said  to  his  mistress,  "And  how  should  I 
do  this  great  wickedness  and  sin  to  God?  "  (ibidxxxix,  9)  The 
substance  of  the  ten  commandments  existed  previous  to  the 
revelation,  and  was  incorporated  into  the  life  of  the  patriarchs. 
The  greatness  of  this  production  consists  in  the  arrangement 
and  the  brevity,  as  well  as  in  the  fact,  that  every  law  of  Moses, 
except  those  in  regard  to  sacrifices  and  priesthood,  is  contained 
in  it,  as  the  tree  with  its  fruits  is  contained  in  the  grain  of 
seed. 

After  Moses  had  interpreted  to  them  the  ten  commandments, 
he  continued,  that  the  God  of  Israel  not  only  is  not  honored 
by  representations  of  silver  or  gold,  but  he  claims  nothing  but  a 
plain  altar  of  earth  or  rough  stone,  erected  in  any  one  place, 
as  the  patriarchs  did.  "  On  everyplace  where  I  shall  cause  my 
name  to  be  mentioned,  I  shall  come  unto  thee  and  bless  thee." 
It  is  evident,  that  Moses  did  not  then  think  either  of  a  taber- 
nacle, or  of  a  priesthood,  or  of  any  of  the  laws  connected  with 
it,  to  which  other  occurrences  gave  rise.  He  thought  of  the 
simple  worship  of  the  patriarchs ;  that  the  first  born  of  each 
family  should  be  the  priest  of  the  family,  as  he  had  told  them 
when  they  were  assembled  before  Raamses;  and  any  spot 
selected  to  the  erection  of  an  altar,  should  be  the  sanctuary 
of  the  family.  He  thought  of  banishing  at  once  idolatry  with 
all  its  causes  and  consequences,  but  he  was  not  sufficiently 


CHAPTER     III,  85 

acquainted  with  the  real  character  of  the  people,  as  we  shall 
notice  hereafter. 

Moses  then  proceeded  to  develop  the  laws  on  this  founda- 
tion, but  as  we  shall  be  obliged  to  treat  on  this  subject  in  some 
other  place,  we  will  return  now  to  history.  Moses  entrusted 
the  government  to  the  seventy  elders,  who  were  under  the 
presidency  of  Aaron  and  llur,  while  he,  in  company  with 
Joshua,  retired  up  the  mountain,  in  order  to  write  down  the 
laws.  He  remained  there  forty  days.  Meanwhile,  a  revolution 
broke  out  in  the  camp ;  the  people  dissatisfied  with  the  state  of 
things,  and  believing  Moses  to  be  dead,  desired  Aaron  to  give 
them  another  leader,  "Arise,  make  to  us  Elohim,  which  go 
before  us ;  for  this  man  Moses  who  brought  us  up  from  the  land 
of  Egypt,  we  do  not  know  what  has  become  of  him."  They 
had  no  confidence  in  Aaron  and  the  seventy  elders,  and  wanted 
an  idol,  having  divine  powers,  to  lead  them  through  that  path 
less  desert.  Aaron  was  not  the  man  to  govern  an  agitated 
multitude,  although  he  might  have  succeeded  if  he  had  tried; 
for  the  better  class  of  the  people  would  have  supported  him  as 
well  as  Moses.  'He  thought  of  preventing  the  making  of  an 
idol,  and  therefore  commanded  them  to  bring  the  earrings  of 
their  women  and  children,  who  he  thought  might  offer  resist- 
ance; but  a  rude  man  in  a  state  of  excitement  is  not  easily 
checked,  especially  if  spurred  by  religious  fanaticism;  they 
brought  plenty  of  earrings  to  make  an  idol.  It  is  easy  to  guess 
what  kind  of  idol  was  made ;  it  was  a  golden  calf,  the  Apis  of 
Egypt;  and  around  this  idol  they  danced  in  wild  ecstasy,  and 
exclaimed,  "  These  are  thy  gods,  0  Israel,  who  brought  thee 
up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt;"  informing  us  their  ideas  of  these 
gods  to  have  been,  that  they  were  gifted  with  the  same  divine 
power  as  the  man  Moses,  who  had  brought  them  out  of  Egypt.  ' 
Aaron,  seeing  himself  unable  to  quench  the  savage  lire,  told 
them,  when  building  an  altar,  "To-morrow,  be  a  feast  to 
God;"  thinking  the  night-rest  might  calm  the  minds;  but, 
behold,  when  the  morning  dawned,  the  multitude  was  assem- 
bled, sacrifices  were  offered,  eating  and  drinking,  and  feasting 
and   the   usual   plays   at   the   dedication   of  Egyptian   idols, 


86  PERIOD    I. 

together  with  all  the  savage  and  immoral  consequences,  de- 
graded the  excited  assembly.  Egyptian  corruption  swayed  its 
sceptre ;  the  savage  passions  held  in  subjection  for  about  three 
months,  broke  forth  now  with  all  their  energies,  as  the  rushing 
waves  which  break  through  their  dam ;  and  the  better  class  of 
the  people  were  obliged  to  observe  profound  silence,  fearing  the 
excited  and  furious  multitude.  Meanwhile,  Moses  returned  to 
the  camp.  On  coming  near  it,  he  heard  the  shouts  of  the 
feasting  multitude;  Joshua,  the  warrior,  supposed  to  hear  the 
shouts  of  war;  but  Moses  listened  with  anxiety,  still  he  could 
not  distinguish  what  those  shouts  meant.  When  he  approached 
the  camp  and  perceived  the  golden  calf,  the  idolatrous  music 
and  plays,  he  threw  away  the  two  tables  of  stone  upon  which 
the  ten  commandments  were  engraved,  and  broke  them  in 
pieces  at  the  foot  of  the  mount.  He  saw  that  he  had  misunder- 
stood the  character  of  the  people ;  he  was  educated  in  all  the 
sciences,  arts  and  secrets  of  the  Egyptian  priests;  he  had  been 
pervaded  by  the  spirit  of  his  ancestors.  But  the  people  had 
grown  up  with  the  superstitions  of  Egypt,  which  can  be  sup- 
pressed, held  in  its  proper  limits,  which  can  even  be  quenched 
for  moments,  but  which  can  never  be  entirely  crushed;  they 
will  rush  forth  occasionally,  as  the  lightning  from  the  dark 
clouds.  There  he  stood,  and  saw  his  great  plans  wrecked  on 
the  rock  of  an  indomitable  superstition.  But  a  great  man  never 
despairs.  He  acted  promptly  and  energetically;  he  seized  the 
supposed  divine  chief  of  the  people,  the  golden  calf,  burnt  it 
and  ground  it  to  powder  in  their  sight,  and  none  had  the  cou- 
rage to  oppose  him.  It  is  an  Egyptian  superstition,  if  one  eats 
or  drinks  what  belongs  to  the  gods,  his  bowels  swell,  and 
sudden  death  follows.  Moses,  therefore,  took  the  dust  of  the 
golden  calf  and  put  it  into  the  water,  and  commanded  the  people 
to  drink  of  it.  By  this  means  he  was  enabled  to  tell  who  was 
free  from  and  who  was  governed  by  Egyptian  superstition. 
He  then  called  to  him  all  those  that  were  faithful  to  God;  and 
there  assembled  around  him  all  the  sons  of  Levi,  besides  the 
others  wjio  had  taken  no  part  in  the  revolutionary  proceedings. 


CHAPTER    III.  87 

After  about  three  thousand  of  the  rebels  had  fallen  under  the 
edge  of  the  sword,  order  was  restored. 

Moses  well  understood  that  the  cause  which  produced  the 
outbreak  was  not  removed,  and  that,  consequently,  similar 
scenes  might  reoccur;  therefore,  measures  were  to  be  taken  to 
prevent  them.  He  also  told  the  wiser  class  of  the  people,  that 
the  multitude,  accustomed  to  idolatry,  could  not  be  governed 
and  satisfied  by  the  sublime  idea,  that  the  omnipresent  God  is 
amongst  them  and  leads  them ;  they  must  be  given  a  tangible 
symbol  of  the  Deity,  an  angel,  whom  they  see,  and  hear,  and 
fear,  to  replace  the  Egyptian  idols.  The  better  class  of  the 
people  mourned  about  this  unpromising  state  of  affairs,  and 
did  not  put  on  their  usual  ornaments.  The  first  measure  of 
Moses  was  to  remove  his  tent  out  of  the  camp,  so  as  to  have 
no  communications  with  the  people,  but  in  official  matters;  in 
order  to  maintain  a  proper  respect  among  the  people  before 
their  leader.  His  tent  was  also  the  seat  of  the  seventy  elders, 
the  highest  authority  of  the  nation.  But  this  was  formerly 
the  only  authority;  now  he  instituted,  on  the  advice  of  his 
father-in-law,  subordinate  offices;  rulers  over  ten,  over  hun- 
dred, and  over  a  thousand,  who  appear  to  have  had  but  the 
judicial  power,  while  the  executive  power  remained  with  the 
princes;  there  were  then  three  instances  before  the  highest 
authority  could  be  reached.  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun,  who  was 
already  distinguished  for  his  valor,  it  appears,  was  entrusted 
with  the  chief  command  over  the  army;  while  the  Levites 
ormed  the  guard  to  maintain  a  due  respect  for  the  Law,  and 
for  the  persons  enacting  and  dispensing  it.  After  Moses  had 
thus  secured  tranquillity  and  order,  he  thought  of  spiritual 
means  to  convince  and  satisfy  the  mind  on  a  point  which 
seemed  to  him  most  essential  and  most  necessary,  namely,  that 
God  led  the  people;  that  they  enjoyed  the  special  grace  of 
providence,  since  a  special  mission  was  entrusted  to  their  care, 
which  was  bequeathed  to  them  by  their  ancestors;  that  the 
supposed  power  of  divinity,  which  their  misguided  imagination 
bestowed  upon  idols  and  relics,  was  placed  in  every  good  and 
wise  man;  and  that,  therefore,  the  idols  must  be  dethroned,  in 


88  PERIOD    I. 

order  that  man  be  elevated  to  his  proper  position,  which  God 
has  assigned  to  him.  But  there  he  met  with  the  insurmountable 
difficulty,  that  none  can  see  God  while  living,  and  those  who 
were  accustomed  to  see  representations  of  the  gods,. could 
not  be  withdrawn  from  this  conception  by  sublime  speculations- 
His  mind  was  full  of  the  most  sublime  conceptions  of  God,  his 
divine  nature,  and  his  government;  but  he  could  not  render 
tangible  those  divine  speculations  to  the  multitude:  still,  he 
knew,  that  nothing  else  could  exercise  a  lasting  influence  upon 
them.  He  thought  again;  and  the  result  was  a  tabernacle  of 
the  congregation,  a  caste  of  priests,  a  mode  of  worship,  of 
pomps  and  mysteries  on  the  Egyptian  style,  which  should  at 
once  satisfy  them  without  corrupting  them,  and  which  should 
not  only  pervade  them  with  nobler  and  higher  ideas,  but  also 
withdraw  them  gradually  from  their  erroneous  conceptions, 
and  bring  them  nearer  to  God  and  truth. 

He  retired  again  up  Mount  Sinai;  but  this  time  Joshua  re- 
mained in  the  camp,  to  secure  tranquillity  and  order.  Moses 
was  absent  forty  days.  He  came  back  with  the  two  tables  of 
stone,  upon  which  the  ten  commandments  were  engraved;*  the 

*  It  has  been  forwarded  by  Goethe,  Hitzig,  and  others,  that  the  Mosaic 
tables  of  stone  did  not  contain  the  ten  commandments  but  the  passage  Exodus 
xxxiv,  11-26,  which  is  but  partially  refuted  by  Hengstenberg ;  we,  therefore, 
must  add  here  the  following  critical  observations. 

We  first  call  the  attention  of  the  reader  to  Exodus  xix,  3,  6,  where  God 
charges  Moses  to  tell  the  people  that  they  have  seen  what  God  had  done  for 
them  in  Egypt,  and  they  should  be  unto  him  a  chosen  and  priestly  nation  if 
they  obey  his  voice;  but  no  mention  is  made  of  the  commands  which  they 
should  ob^y;  still  the  people  answer  (verse  8):  "All  which  the  Lord  has  said 
we  shall  do.11  Besides  this,  it  is  singular  that  the  passage  commences,  "Thus 
shalt  thou  say  to  the  house  of  Jacob,  and  thou  shalt  say  to  the  children  of 
Israel;"  still,  at  the  end  of  the  charge  it  says  again,  "  Those  are  the  words 
which  thou  shalt  speak  to  the  children  of  Israel,"  which  latter  sentence 
appears  to  be  entirely  superfluous.  But  all  these  difficulties  are  overcome,  if 
we  say  God  told  Moses  the  ten  commandments,  which,  of  right,  should  be 
placed  after  the  words,  "Those  are  the  words  which  thou  shalt  speak  to  the 
children  of  Israel,"  but  which  were  set  at  the  place  when  they  were  spoken  to 
all  Israel.  The  terms  onain  rV?N  "Those  are  the  words"  refer  to  the  ten 
commandments.  Moses  came  down  and  communicated  nbxn  Dna*irW?3  rx 
"all  those  words-,"  the  charge  and  the  ten  commandments  to  the  Elders  of 
Israel  (verse  7).   who  understood  the  importance  of  those  words,  and  believed 


CHAPTER   III.  89 

people  greeted  him  with  tokens  of  the  highest  respect.  Moses 
convoked  the  officers  of  the  people,  exposing  to  them  his  plans 
about  a  national  sanctuary  and  priesthood ;  and  having  obtained 
their  consent,  he  convoked  the  people,  and  laid  before  them  the 
proposition  of  erecting  a  sanctuary  to  the  God  of  Israel,  and 
appointing  to  him  a  standing  priesthood,  which  was  received 
with  applause  and  general  satisfaction.  Moses  told  them,  that 
the  tabernacle,  the  vessels  belonging  to  it,  and  the  garments 
of  the  priests,  would  be  made  of  voluntary  gifts;  and  the  people 
brought  so  much  gold,  silver  and  copper;  blue,  purple  and 
scarlet  yarn,  and  linen  thread  and  goat's  hair;  and  rams'  skins 
dyed  red,  and  badgers'  skins,  and  shittim  wood;  and  oil  for 
lighting,  and  spices  for  the  anointing  oil,  and  for  the  incense 
of  spices;  and  onyx  stones,  and  stones  for  setting  for  the 
ephod  and  for  the  breastplate ;  that  it  was  necessary  to  give 
notice  publicly,  that  there  was  plenty  of  every  article  in  the 

their  origin;  therefore,  they  said,  "All  that  the  Lord  has  spoken  we  will 
do." 

It  could  not  be  expected  of  the  people  that  they  should  comprehend  so 
quickly,  and  receive  so  readily,  the  words  of  God,  as  their  elders  did;  there- 
fore, God  said  to  Moses  (verse  8),  that  he  would  speak  to  Moses  in  the  presence 
of  the  people,  that  they  may  hear  and  believe,  which  Moses  communicated  to 
the  people,  and  (xx.  1);  "God  spoke"  nhxn  D^ann-^a  rtN  "  all  those  words 
saying."  Here  is  the  same  expression  as  before,  and,  consequently,  we  have  a 
right  to  suppose  that  the  same  words  were  spoken  to  the  people  as  Moses  had 
spoken  to  the  elders.  The  author  of  Deuteronomy  says  again  the  same 
words  n^xn  nnmn  nx  "  Those  words  the  Lord  spoke  to  all  your  congregation" 
(verse  19).  In  Exodus  xxiv,  we  read,  that  Moses  told  the  people  ^3  r\s 
D^Dcen  TNi  mm  n^n  "All  the  words  of  God  and  the  judgments;"  the  latter  part 
refers  to  the  judgments  which  were  added  to  the  ten  commandments  (xxi,  1). 
Here  a  clear  distinction  is  made  between  the  words  of  God  and  the  judgments. 
Verse  12,  we  read,  that  God  bid  Moses  to  ascend  the  mountain  and  to  receive 
"  the  tables  of  stone  and  the  Law,  and  the  command  which  I  have  written  to 
teach  them."  Here,  again,  a  distinction  is  made  between  what  was  written 
on  the  tables  and  the  Law  (the  judgments)  and  the  command  (referring  to  xxiii). 
It  is,  therefore,  evident  that  Moses  calls  the  ten  commandments  "  those  words" 
or  "  the  words  of  God  "  emphatically,  in  discrimination  from  the  other  laws 
and  commandments,  which  God  promised  him  to  write  on  the  two  tables,  in 
order  to  be  a  testimony  to  coming  generations.  Moses  wrote  all  the  words  of 
God  mm  nin-Vo  pn  and  not  the  judgments  of  which  he  speaks  in  the  previous 
verse,  and  then  he  made  a  covenant  with  them  before  God  r^sn  D^-o-tn-^  ^'j 
The  covenant  was  made  upon  the  tea  commandments,  which  are  the  basis  of 


90  PEKIOD  I, 

hands  of  the  workmen,  so  that  the  people  should  be  restrained 
from  bringing  more.* 

Bezalel,  the  son  of  Uri,  of  the  tribe  of  Jelmdah,  and  Ahaliab, 
son  of  Ahisamach,  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  were  the  chief  artists, 
who  superintended  the  different  deparments  of  weaving,  en- 
graving and  other  works;  "  and  all  women  that  were  wise- 
hearted,  spun  with  their  own  hands." 

While  the  artists  were  busy  with  the  construction  and  erection 
of  the  sanctuary,  Moses  reorganized  the  people,  putting  them  upon 
a  war-footing.  He  convoked  first  the  twelve  princes  of  the  tribes 
(Levi  never  formed  a  separate  tribe),  which  were  for  Reuben, 
Elizur,  son  of  Shedeur;  for  Simeon,  Shelumial,  son  of  Zuri- 
shadai;  for  Jehudah,  Nahshon,  son  of  Aminadab,  for  Issachar, 
Nethanel,  son  of  Zuor;  for  Zebulon,  Aliob,  son  of  Helon;  for 

the  Mosaic  legislation.  The  two  first  tables  were  broken,  as  is  well  known, 
and  God  commanded  Moses  to  make  two  other  tables,  and  ascend  again  the 
mountain.  "  I  will  write  onain  n«  The  words  which  were  on  the  first  tables, 
which  thou  hast  broken."  Moses  obeyed.  God  gave  him  new  information 
about  the  divine  government  of  God,  and  also  new  commandments  against 
idolatry.  Then  he  was  directed,  "Write  unto  thee,  rrVsa  anain  rx  those  words 
nSvn  anann  >o  by  "<a  or  an  account  of  those  words  I  have  made  a  covenant 
with  thee  and  with  Israel."  "And  he  wrote  on  the  table  the  words  of  the 
covenant,  the  ten  words.  To  this  the  author  of  Deuteronomy  adds:  "And  he 
wrote  upon  the  tables,  as  the  first  writing,  the  ten  words  which  the  Lord  had 
spoken  unto  you  on  the  mountain,  from  the  fire  on  the  day  of  the  assembly, 
and  he  gave  them  unto  me."  One  should  hardly  believe  that  one  can  be  thus 
stricken  with  blindness,  so  as  not  to  observe  the  plain  language  in  which  it  is 
said  in  Exodus,  what  was  written  upon  the  tables,  and  go  and  say  Deuteronomy 
contradicts  Exodus.  It  is,  indeed,  a  wonder  that  they  did  not  observe  that  hSn 
signifies  those,  supposing  it  must  be  rendered  this;  it  is  a  wonder  that  Hitzig 
could  be  so  blind,  and  that  Hengstenberg  did  not  discover  the  connection  of  the 
terms  rV?Nn  anam  with  what  was  said  previously.  Still,  he  says  a  good  many 
things  on  the  subject,  which  are  worth  reading. 

The  author  of  I  Kings  tells  us,  plain  enough,  what  was  written  on  the  two 
tables  of  stone,  ^nt^  ya  DJJ  mm  ma  "|B»N  the  words  on  which  God  made  a 
covenant  with  Israel  when  coming  out  of  Egypt,  which  were  the  ten  words 
called  emphatically  the  words,  or,  the  words  of  God. 

*If  it  is  possible,  that  they  brought  from  Egypt  all  the  articles  as  described 
in  the  text,  still,  the  oil  and  the  spice  would  not  have  lasted  so  long  a  time; 
which  proves  sufficiently,  that  they  either  bought  of  caravans  coming  to  them 
from  the  East,  or  from  Arabia  Felix;  or  what  appears  most  probable,  they 
tiadei  themselves  with  other  connUies. 


CHAPTER    III.  91 

Ephraim,  Alishama,  son  of  Amihud;  for  Menassah3  Gamliel,  son 
of  Pedahzurj  for  Benjamin,  Abidan,  son  of  Guidoni;  for  Dan, 
Aliieser,  son  of  Amishadai;  for  Asher,  Paguiel,  son  of  Ochram, 
for  Gad,  Aliasaph,  son  of  Dcncl;  for  Naphthali,  Achira,  son 
of  Enan.  In  connection  with  the  princes  of  the  tribes,  the 
congregation  was  assembled  by  Moses  on  the  first  day  of  the 
first  month,  in  the  second  year  after  the  departure  from  Egypt. 
Every  tribe  was  divided,  as  mentioned  before,  into  a  certain 
number  of  families,  and  every  family  was  subdivided  into  a 
number  of  fatherhouses,  consisting  of  a  number  of  cognate 
families.  These  divisions  were  officered  by  princes  of  tribes, 
princes  of  families,  and  princes  of  the  fatherhouses,  which  cor- 
responds to  the  above  statement  of  princes  over  a  thousand, 
over  a  hundred,  and  over  ten,  without  being  the  same  officers. 
The  twelve  princes  of  the  tribes,  together  with  Aaron,  repre- 
senting the  sons  of  Levi,  and  the  fifty-seven  princes  of  families, 
as  counted  (Numbers  xxvi),  seem  to  have  been  the  seventy  elders ; 
while  the  princes  of  the  fatherhouses,  who  are  called  "yriD  \s"")p 
(Xumbers  xvi,  2),  are  myn  Wip  (ibid  xxvi,  9).  The  appointed 
of  the  congregation  composed  a  house  of  representatives. 

The  people  were  counted  in  the  following  manner :  every  male 
person  above  the  age  of  twenty,  the  Levites  excepted,  gave  a 
silver  coin,  called  a  half-shekel,  as  an  atonement  for  the  sin  of 
the  golden  calf  which  they  had  made;  which  money  was 
appropriated  to  the  service  of  the  Lord  in  the  tabernacle.  Thus 
it  was  ascertained  that  the  following  number  of  men  above 
twenty  years  of  age,  were"  among  the  people. 

Families.  Men. 

Reuben, 4  46,500 

Simeon, , 5  59,300 

Gad,   7  45,660 

Jehudah, 5  74,600 

Issachar, 4  54,400 

Zebulon, 3  57,400 

Menassah, 8  32,200 

Ephraim, 4  40,500 

Benjamin, 7  35,400 


92  PERIOD    I. 

FamilieSi  Molt, 

Dan, 1  62,700 

Asher, 5  41,500 

Naphthali, 4  53,400 


Total  number, ...    57  603,550 

besides  the  sons  of  Levi,  who  were  divided  into  eight  families, 
and  amounted  to  32,000  persons.  The  tribes  were  ordered  to 
march  in  four  divisions;  Jehudah  formed  the  advanced  guard, 
to  whom  were  subordinated  Isaschar  and  Zebulon;  Benjamin 
and  Simeon  formed  the  rear  guard;  commanded  by  Joshua; 
Ephraim,  Menassah,  Asher,  Dan  and  Naphthali,  the  left  hand 
flank;  Reuben,  Gad,  Zebulon  and  Issachar,  the  right  hand 
flank.  Four  standards  named  after  the  four  leading  tribes, 
Jedudah,  Dan,  Reuben  and  Ephraim,  distinguished  the  divi- 
sions. In  the  midst  of  these  four  divisions,  was  borne  the 
sanctuary  of  the  nation,  guarded  by  the  Levites,  which  most 
likely  was  also  the  place  of  the  staff.  When  encamped,  they 
laid  in  the  following  order : 

Dan,  Asher  and  Naphthali  should  encamp  due  north ;  Reuben, 
Gad  and  Simeon  due  south;  Ephraim,  Menassah  and  Benjamin 
due  west;  Jehudah  north-east;  Issachar  and  Zebulon  due  east, 
so  that  the  camp  formed  a  regular  pentagon.  In  the  center  of 
the  camp  was  the  tabernacle,  on  the  north  of  which  the  family 
of  Merari  encamped,  in  the  south,  the  family  of  Kehath,  in  the 
west,  the  family  of  Gershan,  in  the  east  Aaron  and  his  sons, 
and  north-east,  between  Jehudah  and  the  tabernacle  was  the 
tent  of  Moses. 

Moses  also  counted  the  first  born  in  Israel,  which  amounted 
to  32,273,  whom  he  dismissed  from  their  clerical  duties  J 
appointing  in  their  place  the  sons  of  Levi,  giving  the  priest- 
hood to  Aaron  and  to  his  sons,  and  the  sons  of  Levi  were 
made  the  guardians,  bearers,  and  servants  of  the  national 
sanctuary,  as  well  as  the  musicians  and  singers.  Moses  also 
introduced  the  following  signals.  He  had  two  trumpets;  if 
both  at  once  were  blown,  the  representatives  of  the  people 
assembled  at  the  tabernacle;  if  but  one  trumpet  was  blown, 


CHAPTER    III.  93 

the  seventy  elders  were  to  meet  at  the  tabernacle ;  when  the 
first  alarm  was  blown  the  camp  east,  and  the  second  alarm  the 
camp  west,  was  to  rise,  and  so  forth.  But  as  the  signal  of  the 
trumpet  was  not  sufficient,  Moses  resorted  also  to  that  signal, 
to  which  afterwards  Alexander  resorted.* 

When  Moses  had  thus  organized  the  camp,  he  also  took 
proper  care  for  the  maintenance  of  good  morals  in  the  camp, 
for  the  health  of  the  people,  giving  certain  sanitary  laws  con- 
cerning the  cleanliness  of  the  body,  the  tent  and  the  camp;  also 
concerning  food  and  clothes ;  and  concerning  the  corpses  both  of 
man  and  beast,  to  prevent  contagious  diseases;  and  sending 
from  the  camp  the  leprous,  and  other  sick  persons  to  an  ap- 
pointed place,  prescribing  unto  them  a  certain  cure,  for  which 
the  priests  had  to  take  care. 

Meanwhile  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation  was  finished 
and  erected.  The  twelve  princes  of  the  tribes  brought  liberal 
presents  to  the  national  sanctuary  in  gold,  silver,  flour, 
incense,  and  animals. |  Seven  days  of  dedication  were  then 
celebrated,  probably  on  the  seven  days  of  the  passover.  On 
the  eighth  day  Aaron  and  his  sons  were  initiated  into  the 
sacred  service,  on  which  occasion  two  of  the  sons  of  Aaron, 
Nadab  and  Abihu,  died  by  an  unforeseen  accident.  The 
priests  were  charged  with  the  duties,  to  distinguish  between 
sacred  and  profane,  clean  and  unclean;  to  teach  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  all  the  statutes  which  the  Lord  commanded 
them;  and  to  minister  in  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation. 
Then  the  Levites  were  inaugurated  into  their  office;  they 
shaved,  cleaned  and  dressed  all  in  an  Egyptian  manner,  after 
which  they  were  charged  with  their  functions  which  we  shall 
describe  more  at  length  in  the  appendix. 

*  When  Alexander  wanted  to  break  up  his  camp,  a  trumpet  gave  the  signal: 
still  the  sound  of  the  trumpet  was  not  strong  enough  to  be  heard  in  the  tumult. 
He  therefore  erected  a  high  pole  upon  his  tent,  which  was  seen  in  all  direc- 
tions, by  which  the  signals  were  given;  in  the  day  time  that  pole  emitted 
a  smoke,  and  at  night  time  it  emitted  a  flame.  Curtius  Rufus.  Lib.  v.  c.  7. 
Compare  with  Numbers  xi,  15-23. 

t  The  offerings  of  fine  flour  and  incense  are  again  a  proof  that  they  traded 
with   other   countries. 


94  PERIOD    I. 

Being  thus  organized.  Moses  thought  of  marching  towards 
Canaan  and  take  possession  of  the  promised  land,  which  inten- 
tion lie  told  to  his  father-in-law,  whom  he  entreated  not  to 
leave  them,  as  he  knew  where  to  find  places  in  the  desert 
lit  for  encampments,  and  therefore  might  be  their  guide. 
(Xumbers  x,  29-31).  On  the  twentieth  day  of  the  second 
month  the  camp  was  broken  up,  and  the  people  marched  in  a 
north-eastern  direction  towards  Palestine. 

Tradition  has  faithfully  preserved  the  spot,  where  the  sacred 
work  of  revelation  was  communicated  to  Israel;  where,  as  the 
ancient  rabbins  said,  for  the  first  time,  heaven  and  earth,  God 
and  men  met  at  the  sublime  summit  of  truth,  although  Horeb 
itself  can  not  be  pointed  out  among  the  Sinai  mountains  with 
any  degree  of  certainty.  The  Arabs  in  that  region  of  the  wil- 
derness still  behold  with  a  sacred  awe  the  sublime  and  pictur- 
esque sceneries,  which  from  time  to  time  the  clouds  interwoven 
with  light  form  upon  the  summits  of  these  mountains,  and  the 
hundreds  of  millions  that  have  approached  the  fountain  of  sal- 
vation, revealed  religion,  still  look  upon  that  classical  spot  in 
the  desert  with  reverence  and  humility. 

Besides  this  unbroken  chain  of  tradition  from  Moses  to  our 
days,  another  vestige  has  been  discovered  to  fix  the  spot  with 
unquestionable  precision.  Copper,  mixed  with  iron  ore  is 
found  in  the  sandstone  bordering  the  primitive  rock  of  Sinai ; 
the  scoriae  produced  by  their  smelting,  yet  remain  in  large 
heaps*  which  inform  us  about  the  source  from  which  the 
copper  was  taken  for  the  construction  of  the  tabernacle,  and 
which  undoubtedly  was  used  by  Moses  to  complete  the  arma- 
ment of  the  people. 

Arabia  Petraea  or  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai  is  separated 
from  Arabia  by  the  gulf,  at  the  head  of  which  terminates 
the  range  of  mountains  which  sets  off  from  the  Lebanon 
in  the  north  of  Bashan,  where  it  is  called  Mount  Bashan. 
This  range  of  mountains  separates  the  Peninsula  of  Sinai 
from  Arabia.     Another  range  of  mountains  running  from  north 

*  Wilkins.  Modern  Egypt  and  Thebes  vol.  i.,  p.  405;  Lepsius'  Journey  to 
Mount  Sinai,  p.  45. 


CHAPTER    III.  95 

to  south  through  Palestine  terminates  in  this  desert  near 
the  former  range,  about  seventy  miles  south-east  of  the  eastern 
gulf;  between  those  two  ranges  is  the  Valley  of  Salt,  at  the 
southern  end  of  which  is  but  a  narrow  path,  the  Way  of 
Etharim.  About  fifty  miles  north  of  the  Way  of  Etharim  a 
range  of  mountains  sets  off  from  this  middle  range  running 
in  a  south-western  direction  parallel  with  the  first  range  which 
separates  the  Peninsula  from  Arabia,  called  Mount  Seir  or 
Hor.  Between  these  three  ranges  of  mountains  afterwards 
was  the  territory  of  Edom,  who  in  the  time  of  Moses  occu- 
pied but  the  mountainous  district.  South-west  of  Mount  Seir 
is  the  wilderness  of  Paran  and  of  Zim,  towards  which  the 
Israelites  marched,  passing  the  valley  between  Mount  Sinai 
and  Mount  Seir.  But  they  first  marched  along  the  eastern 
gulf  (Numb,  xxxiii,  16-36),  in  order  to  occupy  all  those  places 
which  were  not  yet  occupied,  and  which  Moses  thought  of  im- 
portance; among  the  twenty  stations  mentioned,  there  is  but 
Eziongabar  and  Elath  remarkable,  on  account  of  the  import- 
ance which  they  assumed  afterwards  as  seaports.  The  fact 
that  Moses  went  to  the  eastern  side  of  the  gulf  is  sufficient 
proof,  that  a  plan  of  occupying  the  coast  of  that  gulf  was  con- 
nected with  that  march. 

"When  encamped  at  a  short  distance  from  Sinai  a  conflagra- 
tion consumed  a  large  part  of  the  camp,  wherefore  the  place 
was  called  Taberah  (conflagration).  Next  they  encamped  at 
Kibroth  Hatawah  (graves  of  the  lusty).  The  cause  of  this 
name  was  the  following:  While  they  were  marching  they  could 
not  attend  to  hunting,  and  being  too  far  from  the  western  gulf 
no  supply  of  quails  was  received;  there  was  no  meat  in  the 
camp,  and  the  manna  did  not  suit  the  taste  of  those  who  most 
likely  were  desirous  of  killing  and  consuming  the  cattle  of  the 
others,  which  Moses  could  not  permit;  first,  it  did  not  agree 
with  his  principles  on  the  right  of  possession,  and, second, 
because  they  were  about  to  settle  in  a  country  for  agricultural 
purposes,  to  which  end  it  was  necessary  to  spare  the  cattle,  to 
which  end  a  decree  had  been  published  in  the  camp,  that  none 
should  be  permitted,  under  the  penalty  of  excommunication  to 


96  PERIOD    I. 

eat  any  other  meat  but  venison  or  the  meat  of  certain  sacrifi- 
ces; but  as  the  sacrifices  could  be  killed  only  on  the  altar, 
only  one  of  which  existed,  the  consummation  of  the  live  stock 
was  remarkably  limited.*  As  long  as  they  were  encamped 
they  had  plenty  of  chances  to  obtain  meat;  but  now  they  mur- 
mered  against  Moses,  which  resulted  in  a  revolt.  Moses  found 
himself  in  a  condition  in  which  he  never  before  was ;  for  it  is 
the  first  time  that  we  see  him  lose  his  patience ;  he  could  not 
yield  to  their  demand,  nor  could  he  master  them.  But  he  was 
soon  composed  and  ready  to  act;  he  convoked  the  seventy 
elders  of  the  nation  and  told  them  that  he  was  unable  to  main- 
tain the  Law;  he  resigned  part  of  his  power  into  their  hands. 
It  happened,  however,  by  the  special  grace  of  Providence,  that 
the  quails  came  again  the  other  day  in  great  multitudes,  which 
at  once  quenched  tfie  revolt.  Still  the  national  council  were 
not  satisfied  with  this,  but  they  punished  the  principal  leaders 
of  the  revolt,  which  were  buried  there,  wherefore  the  place 
was  called  Grave  of  Lust.  Eldad  andMedad,  two  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  seventy  elders  addressed  the  agitated  multitude 
whom  Joshua  misunderstood  to  be  agitators,  wherefore  he  de- 
sired Moses  to  silence  them;  but  Moses  knew  them  better,  and 
let  them  proceed  to  pacify  the  people.  Aaron  and  Miriam  were 
displeased  with  Moses,  most  likely  on  account  of  yielding  part 
of  his  power  to  the  national  council;  but  a  sudden  rebuke  of 
Moses  in  the  name  of  God,  and  an  imprisonment  of  Miriam  for 
seven  days  improved  their  judgment  on  the  actions  of  Moses. 
This  dissatisfaction  of  Aaron  and  Miriam  occurred  in  Hazer- 
oth,  from  which  place  they  continued  to  march  along  the  shores 
of  the  gulf  until  they  reached  Eziongabar.  From  that  place 
they  first  turned  in  a  north-western  and  then  in  a  due  northern 
direction,  until  they  reached  Kadash  near  the  frontiers  of 
Canaan  and  Mount  Seir. 

Here  Moses  told  them  to  prepare  for  war,  because  they  had 
arrived  at  the  frontiers  of  their  land;  but  they  remarked 
(Deutr.  i,  22),  that  it  would  be  safest  to  send  first  spies,    and 

*  Leviticus  xvii.,  Deutr.  xii.  20-23. 


CHAPTER    III.  97 

ascertain  the  way  which  should  be  pursued  and  the  cities 
which  should  first  be  taken.  Moses  accordingly  sent  twelve 
men,  one  of  each  tribe,  to  sec  the  land  and  to  bring  them  word. 
Among  the  spies  was  Joshua,  the  faithful  disciple  of  Moses, 
and  Caleb,  a  respected  prince  of  a  family  of  Jehudah.  The 
spies  came  back  and  reported  that  the  land  was  very  good,  as 
a  proof  of  which  they  had  brought  along  a  huge  cluster  of 
grapes,  but  that  the  people  were  too  mighty,  and  the  cities  too 
strongly  fortilied  to  be  overcome,  and  what  was  worse  for  them, 
there  they  saw  again  the  Anakims,  that  terrible  and  invincible 
race,  who  frightened  them  dreadfully. 

When  the  people  heard  that  Canaan  wras  inhabited  by  the 
Anakims,  they  despaired  of  ever  being  able  to  take  the  country. 
A  terrible  revolt  broke  out  in  the  camp,  which  lasted  the  whole 
night;  they  threatened  to  stone  Moses  and  Aaron  to  death. 
Joshua,  who  had  defeated  Amalck,  was  not  in  the  least  fright- 
ened by  the  sight  of  their  old  enemies,  the  Anakims.  He  en- 
couraged the  people,  but  it  was  in  vain;  they  were  too  much 
frightened  by  the  word  Anakims,  and  supposing  that  those 
Anakims  must  have  left  Egypt,  consequently  they  might  live 
now  undisturbed  in  Goshen,  they  insisted  upon  returning  to 
Egypt.  Others  again  made  an  attempt  to  attack  the  Canaan- 
ites  and  Amalekites,  being  but  a  few,  and  they  were  especially 
ordered  by  Moses  not  to  leave  the  camp ;  still  they  made  an 
attack ;  but  when  assailing  the  heights  of  the  enemy  they  were 
thrown  back  with  great  slaughter,  which  increased  the  despair 
and  the  disorder  in  the  camp,  so  that  they  insisted  upon  re- 
turning to  Egypt.  Moses  portrayed  to  them  the  great  suffer- 
ings which  they  would  have  to  undergo  when  recrossing  the 
wilderness,  which  they  by  their  route  of  traveling  supposed 
ten  times  as  long  as  it  really  was ;  that  many  of  them  would 
die  on  the  road,  and  that  their  children  would  still  go  up  and 
take  the  promised  land.  But  in  vain;  they  insisted  upon 
returning  to  Egypt.  Moses  saw  that  it  was  a  vain  attempt  to 
carry  a  despairing  nation  in  war  against  a  desperate  enemy  and 
strongly  fortified  cities ;  he  perceived  that  if  he  succeeded  to 
take  the  land  he  would  bring  out  of  the  battles  a  cruel  mass  of 
7 


98  PERIOD    I. 

warriors,  who  would  be  unable  to  realize  his  great  plans, 
whereas  he  saw  them  without  being  the  least  touched  by  all 
the  great  and  noble  ideas,  he  had  taught  them;  he  could  easily 
predict  that  the  mere  sight  of  the  Anakims  must  make  them 
tremble  with  fear;  and  so,  after  he  had  punished  the  principal 
leaders  of  the  revolt,  and  tranquilized  them  for  a  time,  he 
marched  back  towards  Egypt,  having  previously  spent  some  time 
in  marching  on  the  frontiers  of  the  country,  hoping  for  some 
opportunity  to  convert  the  minds  of  the  people ;  but  none  was 
offered,  and  they  appeared  to  have  insisted  upon  returning 
to  Egypt.  What  a  horrible  disappointment  was  this  to  Moses ! 
He  had  heroically  struggled  against  the  thousand  difficulties 
which  blocked  up  his  rugged  path,  and  now  he  stood -at  the 
gate  of  his  hopes ;  but  now  he  saw  at  once  all  his  hopes  crushed 
and  he  must,  in  order  to  satisfy  them,  march  back  towards 
Egypt ;  but  the  princes  of  the  fatherhouses  the  representatives 
of  the  people,  and  other  men  of  renown,  misunderstanding  the 
design  of  Moses,  that  he  marched  in  a  western  direction  in 
order  to  tranquilize  the  agitated  people,  supposing  his  inten- 
tions to  be  to  return  indeed  to  Egypt,  and  misled  by  the  ambi- 
tious Korah,  Dathan  and  Abiram,  organized  a  new  revolt 
against  Moses,  refusing  obedience  to  the  national  government 
and  threatening  to  incite  the  people  to  a  frightful  degree.  They 
succeeded  in  agitating  the  whole  body  of  the  representatives 
of  the  people  against  Moses.  It  appears  that  a  tremendous 
state  of  excitement  followed  upon  the  first  meeting  to  that 
purpose,  which  threatened  to  produce  anarchy  in  its  worst 
form;  still  Moses,  backed  by  the  seventy  elders,  seems  to  have 
succeeded  in  quenching  the  outbreak  by  dissolving  the  body  of 
the  representatives  of  the  people,  which  consisted  of  two  hun- 
dred and  fifty-two  men,  besides  the  members  of  Levi,  and  by 
executing  Korah,  Dathan  and  Abiram,  as  the  leaders  of  the 
outbreak.  This  anti-revolution,  however,  seems  to  have  had 
the  effect  of  checking  the  desire  of  those  who  had  insisted 
upon  returning  to  Egypt,  and  so  they  encamped  in  the  desert 
of  Kadesh,  where  they  continued  for  a  great  number  of  years, 
according  to  the  sacred  records  for  about  thirty-seven  years. 


CHAPTER  III.  99 

The  people  accustomed  themselves  to  a  nomadic  life,  they  most 
likely  thought  no  longer  of  taking  Canaan.  Moses  had  en- 
camped at  Kadesh  near  Edom,  where  most  likely  the  center  of 
the  people  was,  and  where  they  could  exchange  productions  with 
foreign  traders;  and  so  they  lived  as  many  Arabic  tribes  of  our 
days  do.  No  history  of  that  period  has  reached  us;  there  was 
certainly  nothing  very  remarkable  in  their  life.  They  tended 
their  flocks  in  the  desert,  and  probably  met  three  times  a  year 
at  Kadesh  for  religious  and  national  purposes,  as  the  Law  re- 
quired of  them,  or  probably  as  the  established  custom  was, 
and  as  the  name  En  Mishpat,  fountain  of  justice,  given  to 
Kadash,  suggests;  in  all  other  respects  there  may  have  been  to 
report  of  them  as  little  as  there  is  of  the  nomadic  tribes  of 
our  days.  Whether  the  inscriptions  on  the  rocks  of  the  Valley 
of  Mocattab  were  made  by  Israelites  is  uncertain;  the  same 
uncertainty  overshades  the  hieroglyphical  inscriptions  of  Sura- 
bil-el-Kadim,  which  Laborde  mentioned,  and  which  we  are 
inclined  to  set  at  a  much  later  date.  Moses  may  have  spent 
that  long  time  of  rest  and  tranquility  in  preparing  the  laws 
which  he  intended  to  promulgate  in  Canaan  or  shortly  before 
his  death,  in  order  to  impress  them  more  deeply  upon  the  mind 
of  the  nation;  he  may  have  operated  upon  the  mind  of  the 
rising  generation,  upon  wrhich  he  set  his  last  hopes ;  but  history 
makes  no  mention  of  it.  One  thing  only  has  been  recorded, 
the  fact  that  they  died  by  scores.  Soon  after  the  Korah 
revolt,  a  plague  broke  out  among  them,  which  proved  fatal  to 
fourteen  thousand  and  seven  hundred  persons,  as  the  cause  of 
which  Scriptures  mention  that  the  death  of  Korah  set  no  stop 
to  the  protestations  of  the  people  against  the  dignity  of  Aaron, 
thinking  it  unjust  that  one  brother  should  be  the  political  head 
and  the  other  the  ecclesiastical  head  of  the  nation,  until  the 
budding  rod  of  Aaron  silenced  his  opponents. 

In  the  ninetieth  and  ninety-first  psalms,  which  remarkably 
correspond  with  the  last  song  of  Moses  both  in  terms  and  lofty 
images  taken  from  a  desert,  Moses  complains  about  the  short 
duration  of  life;  about  the  wrath  of  the  Lord  by  which  they 
vanished  as  a  thought;  he  speaks  of  pestilences,  to  which  dis- 


100  PERIOD  I. 

tinct  names  are  given,  which  raged  at  noonday  and  groped  in 
the  dark,  according  to  which  it  appears  that  many  died  after  a 
sickness  of  a  few  hours,  and  that  Moses  was  greatly  alarmed 
by  this  misfortune,  apprehending  the  extinction  of  the  whole 
nation,  and  that  only  the  divine  promise  that  those  alone  would 
die  who  were  above  the  age  of  twenty  at  the  exode,  comforted 
Moses  and  sustained  him.  Although  Moses  served  but  the 
sacred  cause,  nevertheless  it  must  have  been  painful  for  him  to 
see  those  for  whom  he  had  done  so  much,  die  away  so  sud- 
denly; still  he  could  not  alter  the  decrees  of  Providence.  A 
nation  accustomed  to  labor  and  to  a  favorable  climate,  was 
suddenly  thrown  into  a  state  of  inactivity  and  in  a  dry  and 
unfavorable  desert;  it  could  not  escape  raging  pestilences. 
Many  of  them  died  before  the  return  of  the  spies,  but  then 
they  did  not  die  in  consequence  of  their  obstinacy ;  after  the 
return  of  the  spies  they  died  literally  in  their  own  sin,  for  they 
had  refused  to  improve  their  condition  to  go  and  take  the  land 
of  Canaan,  and  therefore  death  was  their  penalty  by  the  decree 
of  Providence. 

The  long  occupation  of  the  southern  frontiers  of  Canaan  by 
Moses  made  it  possible  for  the  aborigines  to  fortify  themselves 
to  the  best  advantage,  so  ihat  it  would  have  been  most  likely 
a  matter  of  impossibility  for  Moses  to  cross  the  frontiers  in 
that  vicinity;  but  aside  of  this,  it  would  have  been  imprudent 
to  cross  at  that  point,  for  as  we  learn  from  Joshua  the  main 
force  of  the  Anahims  was  concentrated  on  the  mountain  range 
rumiing  through  the  land,  and  on  the  west  side  of  it.  It  was 
undoubtedly  a  grievous  fault  of  Moses  to  have  the  army  led  just 
to  the  point  where  the  enemy  was  the  strongest ;  but  it  would 
appear  to  us,  that  Moses  was  not  aware  of  it,  because  their 
greatest  number  occupied  the  mountainous  region  of  Palestine 
after  their  expulsion  from  Egypt,  as  Manetho's  account  of  their 
having  built  Jerusalem  plainly  indicates.  Moses  and  the  more 
intelligent  class  of  the  people  never  abandoned  the  idea  of 
taking  the  land  of  their  fathers ;  they  only  waited  for  the  rise 
of  another  generation,  who  had  not  been  discouraged  by  the 
state  of  slavery  and  dependency  under  which  their  fathers  had 


CHAPTER  III.  101 

suffered  in  ^Egypt ;  who  had  been  trained  in  the  desert,  and 
accustomed  to  endure  hardships,  and  who  were  inspired  by  the 
divine  truth  of  the  Mosaic  law.  That  time  had  come  when 
the  Egyptian  Israelites  had  found  their  graves  in  the  peninsula 
of  Sinai,  a  young,  energetic  and  intelligent  generation  had 
occupied  their  places.  Moses  again  concentrated  the  nation 
around  Kadesh,  at  the  beginning  of  the  fortieth  year  after  the 
exode  as  our  sources  inform  us;  and  when  the  death  of  Miriam, 
sister  of  Moses,  had  attracted  a  numerous  concourse  of  the 
people  to  the  headquarter,  to  bury  her  and  mourn  thirty  days 
for  her,  as  Josephus  states,  Moses  reorganized  his  army,  pre- 
paring them  for  the  great  struggle.  He  had  sent  messengers  to 
the  king  of  Edom  asking  his  permission  to  enter  Canaan 
through  the  territory  of  Edom  between  the  Dead  sea  and  the 
mountains,  which  offered  a  good  road  to  the  fertile  valley  of 
Jordan ;  but  the  king  of  Edom  had  sternly  refused  that  privi- 
lege to  Moses,  notwithstanding  the  promise  of  the  latter  to  pay 
also  for  the  water,  which  they  would  drink.  Therefore  Moses 
saw  himself  compelled  to  return  into  the  desert  by  the  same 
road  by  which  he  had  come  to  Kadesh.  The  army  marched 
back  into  the  wilderness  in  a  south-western  direction  along  the 
base  of  Mount  Seir;  the  want  of  water  again  was  severely 
felt,  which  caused,  as  it  naturally  must  have  done,  a  dissatis- 
faction in  the  camp.  Another  supply  of  water  from  the  rock 
was  obtained  by  the  agency  of  Moses  in  the  same  marvelous 
way  as  once  in  Massah,  in  regard  to  which  it  is  remarked 
(Numb,  xxi,  17-18):  "  Then  did  Israel  sing  this  song,  Come 
up,  0  well;  sing  ye  unto  it,  well,  which  the  princes  have  dug, 
which  the  nobles  of  the  people  have  hollowed  out  by  striking 
with  their  staffs."  Moses  had  lost  his  patience  without  any 
just  reason,  for  want  of  water  certainly  is  a  justifiable  cause 
of  dissatisfaction,  and  addressed  the  people  in  the  harsh  terms: 
"  Hear  now,  ye  rebels,  shall  we  bring  forth  water  for  you  from 
this  rock?"  which  was  reckoned  to  him  a  grievous  sin;  it  was 
a  demonstration,  that  the  humility  and  indulgence  which  char- 
acterizing him  so  eminently,  and  being  now  most  necessary  to 
this  great  struggle,  had  been  lost  in  the  abyss  of  old  age,  as 


102  PERIOD  I. 

this  is  the  case  with  almost  every  old  man.  It  was,  therefore, 
announced  to  him,  that  he  would  not  bring  the  people  into  the 
land  of  their  fathers.  Moses,  himself,  ascribed  this  failure  to 
another  cause  (Deutr.  i,  37;  iii,  26).  Having  proceeded  as  far 
as  to  the  point  where  one  of  the  mountains  was  called  Hor,  a 
spot  which  has  not  yet  been  ascertained,  Aaron,  the  first  high 
priest  of  Israel,  died,  and  was  buried  on  Mount  Hor,  transmit- 
ting his  dignity  to  his  eldest  son  Eleasar.  Thirty  days  the 
nation  mourned  over  the  loss  of  a  man  who  was  not  a  strong 
and  independent  character,  but  was  a  pleasant  speaker,  a  friend 
of  the  people,  a  man  of  peace  and  indulgence,  and  an  important 
colaborer  of  Moses;  he  was  the  example  of  a  priest  as  Moses 
desired  him. 

Having  come  into  the  interior  of  the  desert,  the  people  were 
exposed  to  the  attacks  of  Burning  Serpents,  as  the  original  text 
reads,  the  bite  of  which  caused  great  pain,  and  not  a  few  of 
the  sufferers  died,  which  egain  produced  an  immense  excite- 
ment in  the  camp.  Moses  was  ordered  to  resort  to  the  means 
of  the  Phoenician  Esculapius,  whose  symbol,  the  brass  serpent, 
was  erected  in  the  camp,  which  produced  the  desired  effect. 
They  compassed  Mount  Seir  without  the  occurrence  of  an 
accident;  but  when  they  came  to  the  narrow  valley  called 
Way  of  Etharim,  described  before,  which  forms  the  inlet  to 
the  Valley  of  Salt,  the  Canaanites  had  occupied  the  narrow 
pass  and  attacking  them  had  succeeded  in  taking  some  prison- 
ers of  the  Israelites.  King  Arad  possessed  the  south-eastern 
district  of  Palestine,  to  which  the  valley  they  now  entered 
opened  a  straight  Toad,  if  Moab  permitted  Moses  to  march 
through  its  territory;  wherefore  he  attacked  the  Israelites  at 
the  most  suitable  place.  They,  however,  succeeded  in  driving 
King  Arad  and  his  Canaanites  from  their  positions  and  passed 
the  valley,  wherefore  they  called  that  place  Harmah,  which  is 
but  a  few  miles  south  of  Petra,  and  must  not  be  mistaken  for 
the  Harmah  in  Canaan.  Proceeding  up  the  Valley  of  Salt 
they  had  to  ask  the  permission  of  Moab  and  Amnion  to  cross 
that  valley,  and  to  enter  Canaan  west  of  the  Dead  sea,  but 
they  were  refused  that  permission,  as  the  King  of  Edom  had 
also  done  to  them.     The  march   was   contined  in  a  northern 


CHAPTER   HI.  103 

direction  along  the  mountains  east  of  Moab,  until  river  Anion 
was  reached,  which  formed  the  northern  boundary  of  Moab. 
Messengers  were  dispatched  to  Sihon,  king  of  Heshbon,  who 
occupied  the  territory  north  of  the  Arnon  and  east  of  the  Jor- 
dan, probably  as  high  north  as  to  Mount  Nebo,  to  grant  them 
permission  to  cross  his  territory,  intending  to  cross  the  Jor- 
dan at  the  plain  of  Jericho.  The  King  of  Heshbon  not  only 
refused  them  this  privilege,  but  he  came  with  his  whole  army 
to  attack  them.  Moses  had  made  no  attack  upon  Edom,  Am- 
nion, and  Moab,  because  they  were  congenial  tribes  of  the 
Israelites,  and  although  refusing  them  a  passage  through  their 
respective  territories,  probably  on  account  of  fear  for  their 
neighbors,  still  they  did  not  come  out  against  Israel  with  an 
army.  Sihon,  the  Emorite,  king  of  Heshbon,  came  as  an  enemy 
at  the  head  of  his  army,  consequently  Moses  was  obliged  either 
to  retreat  or  appeal  to  arms,  the  latter  of  which  was  chosen 
with  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  nation.  At  Jahezah  or 
Jahaz  the  battle  was  fought,  which  resulted  in  a  complete 
victory  of  the  Israelites  over  Sihon.  The  victorious  army  over- 
run the  whole  of  Bashan  in  a  short  time,  putting  to  the  edge 
of  the  sword  whatever  could  not  flee,  and  taking  a  rich  spoil 
from  the  nomadic  Emorite.  Having  occupied  the  whole  of 
Heshbon  up  to  Gilead,  Moses  marched  to  the  fortified  Jazar, 
on  the  frontiers  of  Bashan  and  took  it  by  assault.  This 
alarmed  Og,  king  of  Bashan,  who  occupied  the  district  between 
the  upper  Jordan,  Mount  Bashan  and  Mount  Nebo;  and  he,  the 
only  remainder  of  the  giants  east  of  the  Jordan,  came  out  at 
the  head  of  his  army  to  check  the  progress  of  the  Israelites. 
Moses  could  not  cross  the  Jordan  leaving  an  enemy  in  the  rear; 
he  was  obliged  to  attack  Og,  and  a  battle  was  fought  at  Edrei; 
the  generation  trembling  before  the  Anakims  was  buried  in  the 
wilderness,  and  this  young  and  fearless  army  defeated  Og  and 
his  united  forces,  killing  him  and  his  sons,  so  that  no  giants 
were  left  east  of  Jordan.  Bashan  was  occupied  by  the  victors 
in  the  same  manner  as  Heshbon,  and  all  the  land  from  the 
River  Arnon  to  Mount  Herman  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Israel- 
ites, although  many  of  the  villages  were  still  occupied  by  the 
aborigines,  as  we  shall  mention  directly. 


104  PERIOD  I. 

Having  thus  cleared  his  rear  from  the  enemy,  Moses  marched 
back  to  the  plain  of  Moab  north  of  Arnon  to  cross  the  Jordan 
at  the  plain  of  Jericho.  Balak,  son  of  Ziphor,  king  of  Moab, 
terrified  by  the  victorious  expedition  of  the  Israelites,  who  now 
occupied  the  plain  bordering  upon  his  own  territory,  expressed 
his  apprehensions  in  strong  terms  to  the  elders  of  his 
country,  who  took  advice  of  the  elders  of  Midian,  a  nation 
occupying  the  north-eastern  district  of  the  Elanic  gulf,  sepa- 
rated from  Moab  by  the  range  of  mountains  which  are  the 
continuation  of  Mount  Bashan.  The  wise  counsellors  of  those 
two  countries,  instead  of  uniting  their  armies  to  meet  the 
dreaded  foe  in  the  open  field,  or  thinking  of  a  fair  treaty  of 
peace  with  their  warlike  neighbors,  resorted  to  an  ancient  sor- 
cerer, of  whom  it  was  said,  that  he  could  bless  and  curse,  and 
that  either  would  occur  as  the  charm  flew  from  his  lips.  The 
elders  of  the  two  countries  came  to  Bileam,  son  of  Beor,  from 
Pethar  of  Mesopotamia,  residing  in  Midian,  who  was  the 
supposed  prophet  and  charmer,  and  invited  him  to  curse  Israel; 
but  he  refused  to  do  so.  Again  came  the  messengers  of  the 
two  countries  with  rich  presents  and  still  richer  promises,  and 
Bileam  followed  them.  His  trouble  on  the  way  with  his  she 
ass  is  too  well  known  to  be  repeated;  it  is  a  fair  specimen  of 
heathenish  superstition,  wherefore  it  was  preserved  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch. Seven  altars  were  erected  on  an  eminence,  from 
which  part  of  the  camp  could  be  surveyed,  and  seven  bullocks 
were  sacrificed.  Bileam  isolated  himself  for  silent  contempla- 
tion; but  he  could  not  curse,  he  was  too  much  pleased  with 
the  wise  plan  of  the  Mosaic  camp,  and  he  reluctantly  blessed 
them.  Four  times  the  experiment  was  tried  at  different  spots, 
but  he  could  not  curse ;  his  mysterious  words  are  full  of  bless- 
ings and  predictions  of  a  splendid  future. 

An  enemy  much  worse  than  Bileam  was  the  speculation  of 
the  Midianites,  who  sent  lubric  women  into  the  camp  of  Israel; 
immorality  and  incest  threatened  to  degenerate  and  enfeeble 
the  whole  camp,  and  to  abolish  every  vestige  of  obedience  to 
God  and  to  their  leader.  Those  women  succeeded  in  leading 
many  astray  after  Baal  Peor  (the  god  of  incest),  which  threat- 
ened to  overthrow  every  law  in  the  camp,  and  anarchy  was  on 


CHAPTER  III.  105 

hand.  To  this  came  yet  a  raging  pestilence,  which  swept  away 
twenty-four  thousand  men ;  this  was  ascribed  to  the  wicked- 
ness of  those  who  worshipped  Baal  Peor,  and  a  civil  war  was 
on  hand.  The  Baal  Peor  party  had  become  so  insolent,  that 
Simrij  the  prince  of  a  fatherhousc  of  Simeon,  publicly  brought 
a  woman  before  Moses  and  other  Israelites,  stating  before 
them  his  impure  design,  after  which  he  retired  with  her 
to  his  tent.  Moses  now  proclaimed  martial  law,  ordering  the 
officers  to  kill  every  one  who  followed  after  Baal  Peor.  Phin- 
eas,  the  son  of  Eleasar  the  high  priest,  was  the  first  that 
executed  the  severe  law.  He  went  into  the  tent  of  Simri,  killed 
him  and  the  woman,  whose  name  was  Chazbi,  daughter  of 
Zur,  a  prince  of  Miclian.  The  example  of  Phineas  was 
followed  by  other  officers,  the  leaders  of  the  Baal  Peor  party 
were  publicly  executed,  and  after  many  had  paid  with  their 
life  for  the  lubric  worship,  order  was  restored. 

Moses  saw  now,  that  another  enemy  had  been  left  in  the 
rear,  the  Midianites.  He  dispatched  an  army  of  twelve  thou- 
sand men,  a  thousand  of  each  tribe,  under  the  command  of 
Phineas,  to  chastise  the  Midianites  for  their  diabolical  plan. 
They  started  for  Midian,  and  shortly  returned  richly  loaded 
with  costly  spoil,  having  chastised  Midian,  and  put  to  the 
sword  five  of  their  kings  and  also  Beleam.  According  to 
ancient  custom,  they  also  brought  a  considerable  number  of 
captive  women,  the  same  lubric  and  demoralized  beings,  who 
had  brought  so  much  trouble  into  the  camp  of  Israel.  Moses, 
in  order  to  prevent  similar  occurrences,  ordered  all  those 
women  to  be  killed  that  they  might  not  renew  the  calamity 
that  was  just  overcome.  After  the  returning  army  had  held 
the  prescribed  quarantine,  they  returned  to  the  camp.  The 
spoil  was  divided  so  that  half  was  given  to  the  warriors  who 
were  in  Midian,  and  half  to  the  people,  part  of  each  was 
devoted  to  the  national  sanctuary. 

The  last  expedition  and  troubles  in  the  camp  had  kept  Moses 
in  a  high  state  of  excitement,  which  must  have  wasted  the  re- 
mainder of  his  strength;  he  felt  the  approach  of  death.  On 
divine  command  he  appointed  Joshua,  son  of  Nun,  of  the  tribe 
of  Ephraim  as    his  successor,    and    having    obtained    to    his 


106 


PERIOD    I. 


appointment  the  consent  of  the  nation,  he  laid  his  hand  upon 
him,  which  was  the  formal  act  of  appointment.  After  this  a 
new  census  of  the  people  was  taken,  the  result  was  this : 

Persons.  PriDces. 

Unknown. 
Shemuel,  son  of  Amihud. 

Unknown. 
Kaleb,  son  of  Jephoneh. 


43,730 
22,200 
40,500 
76,500 
64,300 
60.500 


Reuben, 

Simeon, 

Gad, 

Jehudah, 

issachar,     64,300  Palliel  "  Asau. 

Zebulon,     60,500  Elizaphan.  "  Parnah. 

Menassah,  52,700  Haniel,  "  Ephod. 

Ephraim,    32,500  Kemuel,  "  Shiptan. 

Benjamin,  45,600  Elidad,  "  Kislan. 

Dan,  64,400  Buki,  "  Jagli. 

Asher,  53,400  Anihud,  "  Shelumi. 

Naphthali,  45,400  Pedahel,  "  Amihud. 

601,730 

This  census  shows  that  they  had  decreased  in  the  wilderness 
with  eighteen  hundred  and  twenty  men.  The  decrease  was 
most  remarkable  in  the  tribe  of  Levi,  which  amounted  now  to 
twenty-two  thousand  male,  persons.  Moses  ordered,  that  the 
above  named  princes,  together  with  Eleasarand  Joshua,  should 
divide  the  land  in  equal  shares  among  the  men  who  were 
counted  by  Moses;  this  gave  cause  of  complaint  to  the 
daughters  of  Zelaphhad,  whose  father  was  dead  and  who  had 
no  brother.  The  complaint  was  that  their  family  was  excluded 
from  obtaining  a  share  of  the  land  of  the  fathers.  Their 
cause  was  heard  before  Moses  and  the  national  council,  and  it 
was  settled  that  they  should  inherit  the  share  of  their  father, 
but  that  they  should  contract  matrimony  only  with  sons 
of  their  tribe,  Menassah. 

The  tribes  of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  half  the  tribe  of  Menassah, 
were  especially  rich  in  cattle  and  sheep,  wherefore  they 
desired  to  take  possession  of  the  conquered  provinces  east 
of  the  Jordan,  not  only  because  the  fat  pasture  of  Bashan, 
which  became  afterwards  proverbial,  invited  them  to  settle 
there,  but  also  because  they  had  an  open  road  to  the 
fertile  valleys  of  the  desert,  while  it  was  yet  doubtful 
whether  they  would  succeed   in  opening    that  road  west   of 


CHAPTER    III.  107 

Mount  Seir,  or  whether  they  would  receive  their  shares  near 
enough  to  the  desert  to  be  able  to  support  their  herds.  They 
stated  their  desire  before  Moses,  Eleasar  and  all  the  princes  of 
the  congregation  who  formed  the  national  council.  The  land 
east  of  the  Jordan  was  granted  to  them,  with  the  provision 
that  they  would  assist  their  brethren  in  the  conquest  of 
Canaan,  in  the  same  manner  as  though  they  had  not  yet 
received  their  portion  of  land,  to  which  the  warriors  of  those 
two  tribes  and  a  half  agreed,  only  wishing  to  leave  in  the  land 
east  of  Jordan  their  families  and  their  herds,  to  which  they 
would  return  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan  was  completed. 
When  this  was  adjusted,  the  tribe  of  Reuben  took  possession 
of  the  southern  part  of  Heshbon,  from  the  River  of  Armou, 
between  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Wilderness  of  Kedemoth,  most 
likely  to  the  Jazer  Torrent.  The  tribe  of  Gad  took  possession 
of  the  rest  of  Heshbon  and  the  southern  part  of  Gilead,  north 
of  Jazer  Torrent,  between  the  Jordan  and  the  territory  of 
Amnion;  its  northern  boundaries  can  not  be  precisely  ascer- 
tained. The  north  of  Gilead  and  Bashan  or  Argob  was  given 
to  half  the  tribe  of  Menassah,  so  that  the  family  Machir  took 
possession  of  Gilead,  the  families  of  Jair  and  Nobah  took 
possession  of  Bashan  or  Argob,  calling  the  whole  district 
Havoth  Jair,  which  reached  north  to  Mount  Hermon.  They 
had  yet  to  fight  the  aborigines  before  they  obtained  possession 
of  the  sixty  fortified  villages  of  Bashan;  yet  they  did  not 
succeed  in  taking  all  the  villages  of  that  district,  which  was 
done  by  one  of  the  later  judges. 

The  whole  province  beyond  Jordan  was  sometimes  called 
Gilead,  or  Gilead  and  Menassah,  and  at  a  later  date  it  was 
called  Perea. 

In  the  last  month  of  his  life  Moses  completed  his  legislation 
in  a  series  of  speeches  now  forming  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy. 
He  reviewed  briefly  the  history  of  their  sojourning  through  the 
wilderness,  exhorting  them  never  to  forget  the  wonderful 
preservation  of  the  nation  in  the  wilderness,  the  work  of 
divine  revelation,  and  the  mission  of  the  nation.  He  censured 
their  faults  and  rebellions  in  strong  terms,  and  predicted  to 
them  a  miserable  future  if  they  should  desert  the  Lord  and  go 


108  PERIOD    I. 

astray  after  other  gods,  and  a  happy  and  brilliant  career,  if 
they  would  adhere  faithfully  to  God  and  to  their  divine  mission 
to  mankind.  He  reviewed  the  laws  which  were  given  in  the 
wilderness  of  Sinai,  and  also  those  given  occasionally  in  the 
desert,  amending,  expounding,  and  also  adding  where  he  deemed 
it  necessary.  He  then  concluded  with  strong  admonitions  and 
exhortations,  always  encouraging  Joshua  and  the  people  not  to 
;bar  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan;  he  composed  a  song  containing 
ihe  quintessence  of  his  last  speeches,  so  that  every  one  might 
know  them  by  heart;  and  after  he  had  delivered  a  complete 
copy  of  the  Law  to  the  custody  of  the  priests,  as  this  was  the 
custom  among  all  nations  of  antiquity,  and  had  commanded 
them  to  read  it  to  the  people  at  the  end  of  every  seventh  year, 
he  assembled  around  him  the  heads  of  the  tribes,  and  blessed 
them  according  to  their  natural  inclination  and  capacities, 
imitating  much  of  the  blessing  of  Jacob.  Then  he  left  them. 
Having  ascended  the  summit  of  Mount  Nebo  and  looked  once 
more  into  the  land  of  the  fathers,  he  died  at  an  age  of  120 
years,  on  the  seventh  day  of  the  twelfth  month,  according  to 
tradition  (1445  b.  c).  His  private  friends  buried  his  body 
somewhere  in  the  adjoining  valleys,  where  none  should  ever 
find  his  grave,  in  order  to  prevent  coming  generations  from  the 
disgrace  of  paying  divine  homage  to  a  dead  man.  A  national 
mourning  of  thirty  days  followed  the  death  of  that  great  man, 
of  whom  it  was  said,  "  and  there  arose  not  since  a  prophet  in 
Israel  like  Moses,  whom  the  Lord  knew  from  face  to  face,  in 
all  the  signs  and  wonders  which  the  Lord  sent  him  to  do  in 
Egypt  to  Pharaoh,  and  to  all  his  servants,  and  to  all  his  land, 
and  in  all  the  powerful  hand  and  in  all  the  great  terror  which 
Moses  did  in  the  sight  of  Israel."  The  gigantic  mind  of  Moses 
overtoAvers  all  the  grandest  characters  of  grey  antiquity;  his 
name  is  sounded  from  one  end  of  the  civilized  world  to  the 
other.  There  is  no  other  man  in  history  who  has  acquired 
such  a  general  fame;  the  Israelite,  the  Christian,  and  the 
Mohametan  bow  down  with  reverence  at  the  mention  of  his 
name.  The  civilized  nations  have  judged  and  decided,  "Moses 
was  the  greatest  among  mortals,"'  and  we  bow  down  reverently 
to  their  decision. 


APPENDIX    TO    PERIOD    I.  109 


APPENDIX   TO   PERIOD  I 


I.  THE  COUNTRY. 

a.  Geographical  Sketch. — The  land  of  Canaan  was  bounded  in 
the  east  by  the  Jordan,  including  the  waters  of  Merom  and 
Lake  Gennesareth  or  Tiberias,  the  Dead  sea  and  the  Valley  of 
Salt ;  in  the  west  by  the  Mediterranean  sea,  between  Egypt  and 
Phoenicia,  including  Phelistia,  and  the  River  of  Egypt,  which 
some  suppose  to  be  the  Pelusiac  branch  of  the  Nile,  but  appears 
to  us  to  be  the  Sihor  river,  which  falls  in  the  Mediterranean  at 
the  point  where  the  line  between  Asia  and  Africa  is  still  drawn, 
and  which  anciently  separated  Syria  from  Egypt,  so  that  the 
Sandy  desert  separated  Egypt  from  Canaan;  in  the  north  by 
the  Lebanon,  Antilebanon  to  the  highest  points  of  Mount  Her- 
mon,  called  in  scripture  Hor-ha-Hor;  and  in  the  south  by  the 
two  gulfs  of  the  Red  sea,  excepting  but  the  territory  of  Edom; 
Arabia  Petraea  was  always  considered  to  belong  to  the  Israelites 
and  Edomites.  To  this  country  was  annexed,  by  the  warfares 
of  Moses,  the  provinces  beyond  Jordan  described  before,  which 
had  Arabia  Deserta  to  its  natural  boundary  in  the  east,  exclu- 
sive of  the  territory  of  Amnion  and  Moab,  and  extended  north 
to  the  vicinity  of  Damascus.  A  range  of  mountains  runs  out 
from  the  Lebanon  and  stretches  across  the  whole  length  of 
Canaan  from  north  to  south,  terminating  in  two  branches  in 
Arabia  Petrsea,  by  which  the  country  is  divided  into  east  and 
west  Canaan.  This  mountain  range  was  afterwards  termed, 
Mount  of  Israel  and  Mount  of  Judah,  east  of  which  is  the  Plain 
of  Jordan;  and  in  the  west  is  below  Mount  Carmel,  the  Plain  of 
Jezreel,  and  other  valleys,  while  the  sea  shores  are  again  hilly, 
crossed  only  by  a  few  small  rivers,  and  having  but  few  bays, 


110  APPENDIX    TO 

among  which  those  of  Carmel  and  of  Joppa  are  the  best 
known. 

The  land  is  about  two  hundred  miles  long  and  one  hundred 
miles  broad,  having  an  area  of  twenty  thousand  square  miles. 
The  fertility  was  great  in  former  ages.  The  vine,  olive,  wheat, 
barley,  granates,  pomegranates,  figs  and  dates,  are  mentioned 
as  the  staple  products;  iron  and  copper  are  mentioned  by 
Moses  as  having  existed  in  abundance,  and  the  sand  of  which 
the  Phoenicians  made  glass,  was  dug  in  the  provinces  of  Issa- 
char  and  Zebulon.  The  hills  and  mountains  were  capable  of 
culture  to  their  very  tops,  and  the  remaining  terraces  show, 
that  this  really  was  the  case. 

It  was  inhabited  in  the  days  of  Moses  by  seven  nations,  viz: 
the  Canaanite,  Hitite,  Hivite,  Girgashite,  Emorite,  Perisite 
and  Jebusite,  besides  the  Phelistines  in  the  south-east,  all  of 
whom  were  sometimes  called  Canaanites;  and  the  most  of  them 
bowed  down  to  the  Anakims,  who  held  both  the  coast  and  the 
mountains  under  their  sway. 

b.  Title. — The  title  of  the  patriarchs  to  the  land  of  Canaan 
has  been  proved  above ;  their  heirs  and  descendants  had  been 
forcibly  restrained  by  the  Anakims  to  take  possession  of  their 
inheritance;  but  they  stood  now  at  the  other  side  of  Jordan  and 
demanded  their  land,  which  they  were  ordered  by  their  legis- 
lator to  take  by  force,  if  not  yielded  to  them  in  any  other  way; 
and  to  which  they  were  perfectly  entitled  by  all  principles  of 
natural  justice.  The  question  to  be  decided  by  the  edge  of  the 
sword  was,  Whether  the  Israelites  or  the  Anakims  should  hold 
the  supremacy  of  the  country.  So  Moses  must  have  understood 
the  question  when  saying,  "Hear,  0  Israel,  thou  passest  to- 
day over  the  Jordan,  to  inherit  nations  greater  and  mightier 
than  thou  art;  cities  large  and  walled  up  to  the  skies;  a  people 
great  and  tall,  the  sons  of  Anakims,  of  whom  thou  knowest, 
and  of  whom  thou  hast  heard;  who  can  stand  before  the  sons  of 
Anak?"  (Deutr.  ix,  12) 

It  was  the  intention  of  Abraham  and  of  Moses,  that  the 
country  of  Israel  should  extend  from  the  Mediterranean  sea  to  the 
Euphrates,  as  afterwards  the  Davidian  and  the  Solomonic  empire 


PERIOD    I.  Ill 

actually  did.*  But  this  should  not  be  done  at  once,  nor  should 
it  be  done  now,  "  Unless  the  land  might  be  desolate,  and  the 
wild  beasts  might  increase  against  thee,"  was  the  remark  of 
Moses.  Those  other  nations  should  not  be  cast  out  by  them, 
but  by  God;  which  probably  means,  that  they  would  either 
be  gradually  absorbed  in  the  Israelitish  nation,  or  emigrate;! 
Moses  ordered  them  to  take  by  the  force  of  arms,  that  land 
only  which  was  theirs  by  the  title  substantiated  above,  to 
which  Moses  and  Joshua  unceasingly  referred.  In  regard 
to  the  seven  nations  inhabiting  Canaan,  it  would  appear  to  us, 
that  the  Mosaic  law  was  utterly  misunderstood.  He  has  been 
blamed  for  an  inhuman  command,  which  he  never  uttered  or 
wrote.  We  have  to  offer  the  following  remarks :  This  passage 
is  preserved  in  the  two  Talmuds. 

"Who  wishes  to  emigrate  may  do  so  unmolestedly;  who 
sues  for  peace  shall  be  received  on  certain  terms;  and  who 
insists  upon  making  war  shall  be  treated  as  an  enemy."  The 
Girgashites  emigrated  to  Africa,  the  Gibeonites  sued  for  peace; 
the  rest  of  them  made  war,  and  were  defeated  (Bab.  Shebuoth 
36  c;  Yerushalm.  Shebuoth,  sec.  vi). 

This  passage  is  supported  by  the  following  circumstances : 

1.  The  passage  is  the  same  in  the  two  Talmuds;  it  is  not 
likely  that  two  different  compilers  should  have  been  so  misled 
as  to  record  one  fiction. 

2.  It  is  adopted  by  Maimonides  (Y.  II.;  II.  Melachim, 
S.  vi),  who  would  have  rejected  it  if  it  were  opposed  to  the 
Pentateuch. 

3.  It  is  recorded  by  two  different  compilers  (Bereshith  Raba 
61,  and  Babl,  Sanhedrin  Berytha  91,  a),  that  the  Canaanites  of 
Africa  claimed  Palestine  before  Alexander  the  Macedonian, 
which  claim  was  defeated  by  Gebihah,  son  of  Pesisah. 

4.  It  is  stated  in  Joshua  xi,  19,  "  There  was  not  a  city 
which  made  peace  with  the  children  of  Israel  save  the  Hivites, 
the  inhabitants  of  Gibeon;  all  the  others  they  took  in  battle." 
Here  it  is  said,  plain  enough,  that  peace  must  have  been  offered 

*  Genesis  xv,  1S-20;   Exodus  xxiii,  31;  Deutr.  xi,  24. 
t  Deutr.  iv,  4-8;  xxviii,  1-14. 


112  APPENDIX    TO 

unto  them,  but  they  did  not  accept  of  it;  if  the  author  meant 
to  say  that  the  Israelites  did  not  grant  peace  to  them,  he  should 
have  inverted  the  terms,  and  said,  "And  the  children  of  Israel 
made  peace  with  no  city  save  Gibeon." 

5.  It  is  stated  in  Joshua  xxi,  43,  45,  "And  the  Lord  gave  to 
Israel  all  the  land  which  he  had  sworn  to  give  to  their  fathers ; 
they  inherited  it  and  dwelt  therein.  And  the  Lord  gave  them 
rest  round  about  according  to  all  that  he  swore  unto  their 
fathers ;  and  there  stood  not  a  man  of  all  their  enemies  before 
them;  the  Lord  delivered  all  their  enemies  into  their  hands. 
There  failed  not  aught  of  any  good  thing  which  the  Lord 
had  spoken  unto  the  house  of  Israel;  all  came  to  pass."  Still 
we  read  in  the  preceding  chapters  that  many  of  the  remainders 
of  the  seven  nations  lived  among  the  Israelites. 

These  five  propositions  make  it  plain  that  Joshua  did  not 
intend  to  exterminate  the  seven  nations;  he  only  desired  to 
make  the  Israelites  masters  of  the  land.  If  Moses  had  com- 
manded Joshua  to  exterminate  the  seven  nations,  he  would 
have  acted  contrary  to  the  Mosaic  law,  which  we  do  not  expect 
of  Joshua,  who  was  a  faithful  devotee  of  Moses.  But  the 
Pentateuch  itself  will  sufficiently  show  us  that  Moses  did  not 
direct  Joshua  to  exterminate  the  seven  nations.  When  speaking 
the  first  time  of  the  intended  war  against  those  nations,  Moses 
says  (Exod.  xxiii,  28),  "And  I  will  send  before  thee  the  hornet 
to  drive  away  before  thee  the  Hivite,  the  Canaanite  and  the 
Hittite."  When  again  speaking  of  the  same  event  (ibidxxxii), 
it  is  stated,  "  Behold,  J  drive  out  before  thee  the  Emorite,"  &c. 
In  Leviticus  xxv,  we  find  a  law  in  regard  to  the  3tann,  of  whom 
slaves  may  be  bought.  The  commentators  who  suppose  that 
Moses  commanded  the  extermination  of  the  seven  nations  are 
forced  to  expound  that  term  as  signifying  a  foreigner  who 
married  a  Canaanitish  woman,  while  nothing  can  be  more  plain 
than  that  thoshab  signifies  the  aborigines  of  the  land,  of  whom 
he  allowed  them  to  buy  slaves.  Moses  calls  the  resident 
foreigner  ntjnn  nj.  The  best  evidence  to  the  truth  of  this  sup- 
position is,  that  the  slaves  were  ever  afterwards  called  'jyjD  ia;», 
Canaanitish  servant,  because  being  descendants  of  the  abo- 
rigines.     In  Deut.  xxi,   10-14,  we  are  informed  that  Moses 


PERIOD    I.  113 

permitted  the  Israelites  to  take  in  marriage  such  women  whom 
they  might  take  in  war  from  those  nations ;  that  if  one  had 
thus  taken  one  of  those  women  and  then  disliked  her,  he  was 
not  permitted  to  sell  her,  but  was  compelled  to  restore  her  to 
liberty.  While  the  first  part  of  this  command  directly  states 
that  Moses  did  not  command  the  extermination  of  those  nations, 
the  latter  part  shows  that  they  were  permitted  to  sell  such 
females  whom  they  did  not  intend  to  take  in  marriage.  In 
Deut.  xx,  10-18,  we  read  the  command,  that  if  they  besieged 
a  city,  they  should  in  the  first  place  offer  to  the  inhabitants 
terms  of  peace,  which,  if  accepted,  made  an  end  to  the  hos- 
tilities ;  the  people  of  such  city  were  to  pay  tribute  and  were 
subjected  to  the  Israelites,  to  which  the  Talmud  adds,  "  pro- 
vided they  receive  the  seven  commands  of  the  children  of  Noah." 
But  if  they  did  not  accept  of  the  peace  so  offered  to  them, 
operations  should  be  commenced,  and  if  the  city  was  taken, 
the  male  persons  might  be  killed,  and  females  and  children, 
as  well  as  cattle  and  other  property,  could  be  taken  as  a  spoil. 
We  understand  verses  13  and  14  to  the  following  effect,  "And  if 
the  Lord  will  deliver  it  into  thy  hands,  and  thou  wilt  smite  all  the 
males  thereof  under  the  edge  of  the  sword ;  still,  women  and  child- 
ren and  cattle,  and  all  the  spoil  shall  be  thine  as  a  prey,"  that 
is  to  say,  none  of  them  should  be  killed.  It  is  there  continued 
that  this  is  the  law  for  such  cities  laying  without  the  land  of 
Canaan;  but  those  cities  laying  in  the  land  of  Canaan  (if  they 
do  not  accept  of  the  terms  of  peace  as  described  above — 
adhering  to  idolatry  and  corruption),  "  thou  art  not  bound  to 
spare  any  person,"  but  "  thou  shalt  utterly  disband  them," 
"  that  they  do  not  teach  you  to  do  their  abominable  works." 
Therefore  rmm  bj  rrnn  vh  can  not  be  rendered,  "  Thou  shalt 
not  suffer  to  live  any  person,"  being  stated  immediately  after, 
that  they  may  take  wives  from  the  daughters  of  the  defeated 
enemy,  which  could  not  relate  to  any  other  nation,  as  inter- 
marriage was  interdicted  only  with  those  seven  nations  (Deut. 
vii,  3);  nor  can  this  latter  law  relate  to  the  inhabitants  of  such 
cities  which  accepted  of  the  terms  of  peace  offered  to  them,  for 
the  text  says,  "And  thou  seest  in  captivity  a  woman  of  a  fair 
8 


114  APPENDIX    TO 

form,"  and  the  people  of  such  cities  were  not  captives.  The 
passage  about  intermarriage  already  alluded  to,  reads,  "  If  the 
Lord  thy  God  will  bring  thee  into  the  land  to  which  thou  comest 
to  inherit,  and  he  will  cast  out  before  thee  many  nations — the 
Hitites,  Girgashites,  Emorites,  Canaanites,  Perisites,  Hivites, 
and  Jebusites — seven  nations  more  numerous  and  more  power- 
ful than  thou  art.  If  the  Lord  thy  God  will  give  them  before 
thee,  and  thou  wilt  smite  them,  thou  shalt  utterly  devote  them 
(disband  them),  thou  shalt  not  enter  into  a  covenant  with 
them;  thou  shalt  not  favor  them;  thou  shalt  not  intermarry 
with  them;  thy  daughter  thou  shalt  not  give  to  his  son,  and 
his  daughter  thou  shalt  not  take  to  thy  son."  If  Moses  had 
commanded  to  exterminate  them,  to  what  purpose  was  this 
law?  If  Moses  had  such  an  intention,  he  could  not  have  said, 
"As  the  action  of  the  land  of  Egypt  in  which  you  have  dwelt 
you  shall  not  do,  nor  shall  you  do  as  the  action  of  the  land  of 
Canaan  into  which  I  bring  you,  you  shall  not  go  in  their  sta- 
tutes "  (Leviticus  xviii,  2).  If  they  were  exterminated  none 
could  imitate  their  doings  nor  walk  in  their  statutes.  It  there- 
fore appears  to  us  to  have  been  the  policy  of  Moses  in  regard 
to  the  seven  nations,  either  to  drive  them  away  from  the 
country,  or  to  make  peace  with  those  who  consented  to  do 
away  with  idolatry  and  the  corruptions  connected  with  that 
abomination  (vide  Levit.  xviii),  to  be  subject  and  tributary  to 
Israel;  or  to  dissolve  entirely  and  to  disband  those  nations, 
or  the  inhabitants  of  such  cities,  who  insisted  upon  making 
war  upon  Israel  and  maintained  their  idolatrous  corruptions. 
But  if  once  dissolved,  and  they  became  consequently  harmless 
to  the  community,  after  being  obliged  to  renounce  idolatry, 
they  might  dwell  among  the  Israelites,  of  whom  slaves  might  be 
bought  if  they  were  willing  to  sell;  but  with  whom  no  inter- 
marriage should  take  place,  unless  they  embraced  entirely  the 
laws  of  Moses,  as  they  might  easily  return  in  secret  to  their 
gods. 

It  appears,  therefore,  to  us,  that  war  was  waged  in  order, 

1.  To  make  the  Israelites  again  masters  of  the  land,  and 

2.  To  abolish  idolatry  and  the  practices  connected  with  it. 


PERIOD  I.  115 

Moses  bade  them  to  destroy  the  idols  together  with  the  tem- 
ples, altars,  statues,  groves  and  utensils  devoted  to  them,  and 
to  change  even  the  names  of  places  if  they  were  called  after 
certain  idols.  There  was  certainly  a  good  right  to  oppose  by 
any  means  an  idolatry  which  was  thus  abominable  that  fathers 
sacrificed  their  own  children;  that  gods  of  incest,  gluttony 
and  drunkenness  were  worshiped,  so  that  not  only  morality 
fell  a  victim  to  the  most  horrid  superstitions,  but  also  every 
energy  of  the  human  intellect  was  crippled  by  the  most 
ridiculous  aberrations.* 

In  order  to  save  the  commonwealth  which  he  had  constituted, 
to  lay  a  solid  foundation  for  the  civilization  of  mankind  which 
he  had  predicted;  to  bring  mankind  nearer  to  truth,  and  to 
abolish  corruption  and  superstition  to  the  benefit  of  all  coming 
generations,  Moses  was  legally  entitled  to  remove  all  the 
obstacles,  every  impediment,  be  it  men,  cities  or  temples,  pro- 
vided it  be  admitted,  that  the  progress  of  civilization  tends  to 
the  happiness  of  mankind,  and  that  this  is  the  final  cause  of 
social  compacts. 

c.  The  Design. — The  steady  purpose  pursued  by  the  patriarchs 
was,  as  we  have  noticed  before,  to  establish  an  independent 
tribe,  in  the  midst  of  whom  One  God  should  be  worshiped, 
purity  of  morals  and  chastity  should  be  maintained,  fraternal 
love  and  charity  should  be  practiced,  and  moral  corruption, 
idolatry  and  its  abominable  consequences  be  unknown. 

The  divine  promise  given  to  Abraham  and  repeated  to  Jacob, 
"And  there  shall  be  blessed  through  thee,  all  the  families  of 
the  earth,"  contains  the  design,  which  the  patriarchs  wished  to 
obtain;  those  doctrines  and  principles  which  inspired  them 
to  noble  actions,  and  made  their  life  a  happy  one,  should 
become  gradually  the  source  of  happiness  to  humanity  in 
general.  Moses  only  continued  in  this  respect  the  labors  of  the 
patriarchs;  he  renewed  the  covenant  between  God  and  the 
descendants  of  Abraham,  which  had  been  interrupted  in  con- 
sequence of  their  sojourn  in  Egypt.     The  patriarchs  occupied 

'*Deutr.  xviii,  9-14;  xx,  18;  xii,  31. 


116  APPENDIX    TO 

Canaan  to  the  end  of  having  a  country  where  they  might, 
undisturbed,  realize  their  ideals  of  religion,  morals  and  poli- 
tical government.  Moses  reclaimed  the  same  land  to  be  sub- 
servient to  the  same  design.  It  would  have  been  contrary  to 
the  fundamental  policy  of  Moses,  to  tolerate  idolatry  in  the 
very  land  which  was  claimed  to  the  design  of  abolishing  that 
source  of  corruption,  and  in  the  midst  of  that  very  people, 
whose  mission  it  was  to  be  the  standard  bearer  of  the  divine 
truth.  Besides,  there  was  another  cause  of  commanding  the 
total  extinction  of  idolatry  in  their  land;  it  was  this,  Moses 
was  aware  that  his  age  was  not  a  philosophical  one ;  he  spoke  to 
the  hearty  sons  of  the  desert,  with  whom  the  feelings  pre- 
dominated over  the  understanding.  Idolatry  satishes  the 
senses;  the  pagan  mode  of  worship  and  their  lively  games 
charms  the  sensual  nature  of  man.  If  the  intellectual  capacities 
of  man  are  not  sufficiently  cultivated  and  strengthened,  he 
readily  yields  to  the  influences  of  idolatry.  Moses  knowing 
his  people,  apprehended  justly,  if  the  example  of  idolatry  was 
left  in  the  midst  of  them,  they  would  readily  yield  to  its  influ- 
ences, which  must  have  resulted  in  the  destruction  of  their 
design.  And  as  the  human  body  ejects  what  is  not  subservient 
to  the  design  of  life;  so  the  genius  of  history  rejects  every 
nation  failing  to  be  subservient  to  the  grand  and  general  design 
of  Providence. 

Idolatry,  if  the  whole  nation  had  yielded  to  it,  would  have 
been  the  moral  death  of  the  design  of  Israel;  and,  conse- 
quently, the  expiration  of  its  national  existence  would  have 
followed  as  the  necessary  consequence. 

This  brief  exposition  of  the  design  of  Israel  will  explain  the 
cause  why  Moses  spoke  so  much  and  so  severely  against  the 
practice  of  idolatry;  why  he  predicted  the  dissolution  of  their 
nationality  if  they  should  ever  yield  to  that  practice.  But,  at 
the  same  time,  it  also  justifies  the  course  Moses  adopted 
against  the  temples,  groves,  idols  and  their  obstinate  wor- 
shipers ;  because  every  nation  has  a  right  to  adopt  measures  to 
secure  its  own  existence. 

d.  The  Division  and  Inheritance  of  the  Land. — The  land  of 


PERIOD    I.  117 

Palestine,  including  the  province  east  of  Jordan,  contained, 
according  to  the  calculations  of  Reland,  Spanheim,  and  Low- 
man,*  a  territory  of  above  sixteen  millions  of  acres.  Making 
the  suitable  allowance  for  lakes,  rivers,  unproductive  tracts  of 
land,  the  cities  of  the  Levites,  and  reserving  some  land  for 
public  uses  with  one-fourth  of  the  whole  territory,  the  allot- 
ment of  nearly  twenty  acres  to  every  Israelite  capable  of  bearing 
arms,  which  must  have  been  the  size  of  the  lots,  could  supply 
ample  means  for  frugal  and  plenty  enjoyment. 

If  we  consider  the  uncommon  productiveness  of  the  soil  as 
described  by  Moses,  and  continued  not  only  by  the  whole  of 
history,  but  also,  by  the  special  remarks  of  Tacitus,  and  the 
numerous  accounts  of  modern  travelers;  it  will  not  surprise 
us  when  Moses  tells  the  Israelites  that  God  gives  them  "Aland 
wherein  thou  shalt  eat  bread  without  scarceness,  thou  shalt 
not  lack  any  thing  in  it."  This  land  was  to  be  divided  into 
equal  lots,  according  to  the  number  of  men  from  twenty  years 
old  and  above  it,  the  Levites  excepted,  so  that  every  man 
receive  one  such  lot,  which,  according  to  the  aforestated  cal- 
culation, was  about  twenty  acres  of  land.  The  Roman  people, 
under  Romulus,  and  long  after,  could  afford  only  two  acres  to 
every  legionary  soldier;  and  in  the  most  nourishing  days  of  that 
commonwealth,  the  allowance  did  not  exceed  four  acres.  Hence, 
the  quatuor  jvgera,  or  four  acres,  is  an  expression  which  pro- 
verbially indicated  plebeian  affluence  and  contentment — a  full 
remuneration  for  the  toils  of  war,  and  a  sufficient  inducement 
at  all  times  to  take  up  arms  in  defence  of  the  republic. 

The  Levites  should  be  given  forty-eight  cities,  together  with 
two  thousand  amath  of  the  land  surrounding  each  of  their 
cities,  of  which  six  were  made  places  of  refuge  to  the  man 
slayer,  on  which  we  shall  treat  hereafter.  Besides  that,  the 
equal  division  of  the  land  was  a  matter  of  justice,  as  all  of  them 
were  the  legal  heirs  to  the  property  of  the  patriarchs,  it  was 
also  unquestionably  a  prudent  policy  calculated  to  maintain  an 

*  Reland's  Palestina  Illustrata,  lib.  ii,  c.  5;  Spanheim's  Charta  Terrae 
Israelis;  Lowman  on  the  Civil  Government  of  the  Hebrews-,  Russell's  Pales- 
tine, c.  ii 


118  APPENDIX   TO 

equality  among  the  people,  which  is  the  best  nurse  of  political 
liberty.  The  same  is  the  case  with  the  possessions  of  the 
Levites ;  they  were  made  dependent  for  subsistence  on  the  peo- 
ple, so  that  the  agricultural  prosperity  of  the  nation  was  made 
one  of  their  designs;  still,  they  were  to  live  in  cities,  and  free 
from  manual  labor;  so  as  to  enable  them  to  cultivate  science 
and  arts,  and  to  be  the  guardians  of  the  Law. 

Moses  thus  gave  them  the  same  ample  chances  and  induce- 
ments as  the  Egyptian  priests  had,  to  cultivate  science  and  arts ; 
but  he  did  not  give  the  material  means  to  enslave  the  people  as 
the  Egyptian  priests  did.  This  method  of  dividing  the  land 
among  the  people  was  a  signal  reform,  and  calculated  to  uproot 
at  once  the  causes  which  made  Egypt  a  priest-ridden  and  mis- 
governed country.  It  was  an  internal  part  of  the  grand  whole 
in  the  truly  democratic  policy  of  Moses. 

The  land  should  be  divided  among  the  twelve  tribes,  according 
to  their  numbers  of  persons,  so  that  every  tribe  have  its  sepa- 
rate and  distinct  possession;  the  exact  boundaries  of  which  to 
be  established  by  Joshua,  the  high  priest  and  the  princes  of  the 
tribes,  in  order  that  no  difficulties  might  arise  among  them  in 
some  future  day  about  the  boundaries  of  the  tribes,  which  has 
disturbed  the  peace  of  many  a  community.  The  possession  of 
each  tribe  should  be  divided  among  the  families  descending  from 
one  sire,  according  to  their  respective  number  of  persons ;  and 
the  possession  of  each  family  should  be  divided  among  the 
fatherhouses  belonging  to  each  family  again,  according  to  the 
number  of  persons ;  so  that  cognates  only  should  live  together 
on  their  different  lots.  This  measure  was  wisely  calculated  to 
maintain  peace  and  good  order  in  the  country.  We  shall 
endeavor,  hereafter,  to  show,  that  this  measure  was  also  cal- 
culated to  protect  the  liberties  of  the  people.  The  cities  of 
the  Levites  should  be  given  among  all  the  tribes  in  an  equal 
ratio,  so  as  to  give  them  ample  chance  to  communicate  with 
the  whole  of  the  nation,  and  to  secure  the  union  and  harmony 
of  the  twelve  tribes. 

The  land  in  the  possession  of  each  individual  should  be 
inherited  by  his  sons  or  their  heirs;  in  default  of  male  issues 


PERIOD    I.  119 

by  his  (laughters  or  their  heirs ;  in  default  of  an  issue  of  the 
body  by  the  father  of  the  deceased  by  his  brothers  or  their 
heirs  if  the  father  was  dead;  by  his  sisters  or  their  heirs  if  the 
brother  was  dead;  by  the  grandfather  if  deceased  had  no  bro- 
ther and  no  sister,  and  his  father  was  dead;  by  the  brothers 
of  his  father  or  their  heirs  if  the  grandfather  was  dead;  by  the 
sisters  of  his  father  or  their  heirs  if  his  father  had  no  brothers, 
&c.  (Xmnb.  xxvii,  6-11).  The  first  born  son  received  a  double 
portion  of  the  property  of  his  father  (Deutr.  xxi,  17),  which 
law  we  notice  first  in  the  last  will  of  Jacob.  Remarkable  it  is 
that  in  the  seventeenth  book  of  the  laws  of  Menos,  it  is  or- 
dained, that  the  property  be  divided  into  equal  shares,  of  which 
two  belong  to  the  eldest  born.  If  a  man  die  childless,  the 
brother  was  not  only  the  heir  of  his  property,  but  with  certain 
limitations  also  of  his  wife;  and  it  was  a  positive  law  based 
upon  ancient  custom,  that  he  take  her  in  marriage,  and  the 
first  son  she  should  bear,  be  the  heir  and  also  bear  the  name 
of  the  deceased  brother.  But  if  he  refused  to  take  in  marriage 
his  sister-in-law,  the  eldest  of  the  city  should  call  him  and 
speak  to  him;  if  he  then  insisted  upon  his  refusal,  he  should  be 
put  to  shame  in  the  presence  of  the  public  (Deutr.  xxv,  5-10). 
Women  were  under  certain  circumstances  excluded  from  the 
inheritance  of  property,  which  maybe  attributed  to  the  follow- 
ing causes: 

1.  It  was  so  among  almost  all  nations  of  antiquity;  the  wife 
was  bought,  and  not  seldom  for  a  high  price,  consequently,  she 
needed  no  property ;  the  presents  which  the  servant  of  Abraham 
gave  to  the  relatives  of  Rebecca;  the  fact  that  Jacob  served 
Laban  fourteen  years  for  his  two  daughters;  that  Shechem 
offered  a  large  dowry  to  Jacob  for  Dinah  his  daughter,  are 
sufficient  to  demonstrate  that  the  custom  of  buying  the  wife  was 
common  among  the  Hebrews. 

2.  If  the  daughters  had,  in  all  cases,  inherited  the  father's 
property  with  the  sons,  Moses  would  have  been  obliged  either 
to  make  laws  on  marriage,  that  no  woman  dare  marry  out  of 
her  tribe ;  or  he  must  have  admitted,  that  the  division  of  the 


120  APPENDIX    TO 

land  to  the  tribes,  families  and  fathcrhouses  was  only  temporary; 
either  of  which  was  against  the  spirit  of  his  laws. 

To  make  laws  against  the  natural  affections  is  a  tyranny,  and 
would  have  widely  distracted  the  tribes  from  each  other.  The 
division  of  the  land  as  it  was,  was  essential  to  the  policy  of 
Moses,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter.  He  secured  the  permanence 
of  this  division  of  the  land  by  the  following  laws : 

If  one  sold  a  real  estate,  he  and  his  relatives  not  only  had 
the  right  to  redeem  the  property  at  any  time,  but  even  if  it  was 
not  redeemed,  it  was  restored  to  the  original  owner  at  the 
jubilee  year,  which  happened  every  fiftieth  year,  so  that  no 
piece  of  land  could  be  sold  permanently.  The  same  law  was 
to  have  effect  on  houses,  except  the  houses  of  such  cities  which 
were  surrounded  by  a  wall  where  the  original  owner  and  his 
relatives  had  the  right  of  redemption  for  but  one  year  after  the 
sale  thereof.  From  this  law  were  excepted  the  fields  of  the 
Levites,  which  could  not  be  sold  at  all;  and  the  houses  of 
the  Levites,  which  not  only  every  Levite  could  redeem,  but 
also  was  returned  to  the  original  owner  at  the  jubilee  year 
(Levit.  xxv).  While  the  latter  law  was  calculated  to  keep  the 
Levites  separated  from  the  rest  of  their  people  in  their  respective 
cities  for  purposes,  as  we  shall  specify  afterwards,  the  former 
law  was  calculated  to  secure  permanence  to  the  division  of  the 
land,  the  coinhabiting  of  the  same  district  of  land  by  cognate 
families,  to  maintain  the  distinction  of  tribes;  and,  what  was 
very  important,  to  guard  the  people  against  extreme  poverty 
on  one  side,  and  the  accumulation  of  property  with  a  few  rich 
proprietors  on  the  other  side. 

d.  Occupation. — Pastoral  and  agricultural  pursuits  were  the 
occupation  of  the  patriarchs,  of  their  descendants  in  Egypt, 
and  it  was  intended  to  remain  the  occupation  of  the  nation. 
The  whole  of  the  Mosaic  law  is  based  upon  this  idea ;  the  feasts 
of  the  nation,  the  sacrifices  and  other  sacred  gifts,  the  civil 
and  political  government,  the  different  rites  and  ceremonies, 
were  based  upon  this  mode  of  occupation.  Moses  did  not 
think  of  excluding  the  arts  and  commerce  from  the  Israelitish 
territory ;  but  he  did  not  make  these  the  basis  of  the  common- 


PERIOD     I.  121 

wealth,  which,  if  separated  from  agriculture,  as  this  was  the 
case  afterwards  in  the  Italian  cities,  could  not  last  very  long; 
and  if  agriculture  flourished  they  could  not  be  excluded,  par- 
ticularly not  in  Palestine ;  which  has  a  very  happy  location  for 
foreign  commerce. 

e.  Products. — The  products  of  Canaan  in  the  time  of  the 
patriarchs  we  know  to  have  been  grains,  especially  wheat  and 
barley,  as  it  is  recorded  that  Isaac  did  sow  and  gather  in;  that 
Abraham  had  flour.  Jacob  said  to  his  sons,  "  Take  of  the  best 
fruits  of  the  land  in  your  vessels,  and  carry  down  to  the  man  a 
present,  a  little  balm,  and  a  little  honey,  spices  and  myrrh, 
nuts  and  almonds"  (Genesis  xliii,  11);  therefore,  those  tropical 
fruits  must  have  grown  in  Canaan.  In  the  times  of  Moses  we 
are  informed,  the  land  produced  wheat,  barley,  wine,  figs, 
pomegranates,  olives,  honey,  dates  and  granates  (Deutr.  viii, 
8);  palm  trees,  citron  trees,  and  myrtles  (Levit.  xxiii,  40).  It 
admits  of  no  doubt,  that  the  land  was  then  capable  of  producing 
all  the  tropical  fruits  and  all  species  of  grain,  and  was  there- 
fore capable  of  sustaining  a  large  population;*  which  is  more 
than  sufficiently  confirmed  by  modern  travelers.!  There  are 
also  mentioned  in  the  Bible  to  have  grown  in  Palestine  the 
cedar,  terebinthe,  pistacea,  tamarisk  and  sycamore.  It  was 
literally  a  land  in  which  a  rich  vegetation,  a  healthy  climate, 
and  a  happy  location,  were  united  to  the  best  advantages.  No 
other  metals  are  mentioned  in  the  Pentateuch  to  be  obtained  in 
Palestine,  than  iron  and  copper  (Deutr.  viii,  9). 

II.  THE  GOVERNMENT. 

a.  The  People. — It  has  been  remarked  frequently,  that  the 
people  were  divided  into  twelve  independent  tribes,  each  of 
which  was  governed  by  its  own  nassi  (prince).  The  tribes 
were  subdivided  into  families,  each  of  which  had  again  a  nassi, 
subject  to  the  nassi  of  the  tribe;  and  every  family  was  sub- 


*  Tacitus,  Hist.  v.  G;  Ammian.  Marcell.  xiv,  8;  Josephus  in  many  passages. 

t  Robinson,    ii,  356;    Shaw,  190;  Arvieux   ii,  203;    De  Wette,    Archeol. 
4  81. 


J  22  APPENDIX    TO 

divided  into  a  number  of  fatherhouses,  which  again  were 
governed  by  a  nassi  or  rosh-beth-ab,  subject  to  the  former, 
agreeable  to  which  the  land  was  to  be  divided.  It  has  been 
frequently  asked,  whether  these  dignities  were  hereditary, 
elective  by  the  people,  or  appointed  by  the  chief  of  the  nation? 
As  there  is  no  express  provision  in  the  laws  of  Moses  on  the 
subject,  we  are  obliged  to  make  inferences  subservient  to  its 
determination.  The  passage,  *  'Judges  and  officers  shalt  thou 
give  unto  thee,  in  all  thy  gates  "  (Deutr.  xvi,  18),  seems  to 
imply  a  popular  election;  this  is  yet  further  supported  in 
regard  to  the  officers  by  another  passage  (Deutr.  i,  13),  "Fur- 
nish for  yourselves  wise  and  understanding  men,  and  those 
known  among  your  tribes,  and  I  will  place  them  as  officers 
over  you."  Besides  this,  it  must  be  confessed,  that  a  popular 
election  of  officers  is  most  agreeable  to  the  whole  of  the  Mo- 
saic dispensation.  It  appears  that  the  mode  of  electing  officers 
was  well  settled  among  them,  for  which  reason  no  special  law 
on  the  subject  was  deemed  necessary. 

The  rabbins,  however,  held,  that  all  offices  were  hereditary, 
agreeably  to  the  laws  of  inheritance  in  regard  to  property; 
provided  the  heir  was  deemed  qualified  for  the  respective  office, 
on  which  those  had  to  decide,  who  were  affected  by  such  an 
office.*  But  this  seems  to  have  been  the  case  only  through  the 
later  part  of  our  history,  and  it  appears  not  to  have  been  cus- 
tomary before  the  time  of  the  Maccabees. 

Every  male  person,  born  of  an  Israelitish  mother,  or  being 
the  son  of  an  Israelitish  father,  having  reached  the  age  of 
twenty  years,  was  a  free  citizen  entitled  to  vote  and  to  be 
elected  to  all  offices,  except  the  sacerdotal,  if  not  disqualified 
by  crimes  upon  which  the  law  set  the  penalty  of  excommunica- 
tion, called  in  the  Pentateuch,  korath,  "to  be  cut  off  from 
among  his  people." 

Besides,  the  Israelites,  mix  "offspring,"  the  law  mentions 
the  atfin  "  aborigines,"  the  1J  "  resident  alien,"  the  nM  "  non- 
resident alien"  and  the  nay  "servant,"  which  were  again 
distinguished   into  Hebrew   servants,  and  those   bought  from 

*  Maimonides,  Kings}  ch.  i,  §  7. 


PK1II0D    I.  123 

other  nations.  In  regard  to  the  resident  alien,  it  is  frequently 
remarked,  "There  shall  be  one  law  unto  all  of  you,  unto  the 
native  of  the  land  and  the  alien."  It  is  evident,*  that  neither 
the  aborigines  nor  the  resident  foreigner  was  required  to  em- 
brace Judaism,  although,  he,  as  a  matter  of  course,  was 
expected  not  to  act  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the  country,  which 
is  also  the  opinion  of  the  rabbins,  that  the  resident  alien  was 
obliged  to  observe  the  seven  commandments  of  the  children  of 
Noah. 

In  regard  to  the  aborigines,  the  exceptional  law  of  not 
intermarrying  with  them,  if  they  did  not  fully  embrace  the 
religion  of  the  country,  must  be  remarked  here.  As  regards 
the  qualification  to  office,  the  rabbins  held,  that  none  could 
hold  office,  if  not  at  least  his  mother  was  an  Israelitish 
woman.! 

This  appears  to  us  to  be  a  law  of  a  later  origin;  for  we 
read  in  the  Pentateuch,  when  speaking  of  the  appointment 
of  a  king  (Deutr.  xvii,  14-20),  "  Thou  canst  not  set  over  thee 
a  foreign  man,  who  is  not  of  thy  brethren."  If  it  was  necessary 
to  make  this  provision  in  regard  to  the  highest  office,  it  be- 
comes evident  that  the  alien  must  have  been  qualified  to  every 
other  office ;  for  if  he  had  been  excluded  from  holding  inferior 
offices,  it  would  not  have  been  necessary  to  make  that  provision 
in  regard  to  the  supreme  dignity.  The  framers  of  the  consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  must  have  understood  the  law  to 
the  same  effect.  Besides  this,  it  must  be  remarked,  that  a  pro- 
vision was  made  excluding  Ammonites,  Moabites  andEdomites 
from  the  national  council  (Deutr.  xxiii,  2-4);  if  all  aliens  had 
been  excluded  from  that  dignity,  no  provision  would  have  been 
necessary  in  regard  to  those  neighboring  nations.  Still,  it 
appears,  that  the  election  for  officers  was  done  by  the  families, 
or  fatherhouses,  into  which  the  nation  was  divided,  conse- 
quently, none  could  vote  for  officers  or  be  elected  to  an  office 
unless  he  had  been  admitted  into  one  of  the  families.  They 
had  the  privilege  to  admit  any  one  alien,  with  the  exception  of 
Ammonites,  Moabites  and  Edomites,  but  afterwards,  it  would 

*  From" Exodus  xii,  43-45;  Deutr.  21. 

tMaimonide9,  Kin^3  ch.  i,  $ 


124  APPENDIX    TO 

appear,  the  law  was,  that  only  such  an  alien  could  be  admitted 
into  a  family,  who  married  one  of  the  daughters  belonging  to  it. 
The  facts  of  history  support  our  opinion;  for  aliens  held 
offices  under  almost  all  the  kings,  especially  under  Saul,  David 
and  Solomon.  As  regards  the  right  of  possession,  the  division 
of  the  land  made  it  to  be  a  matter  of  impossibility  to  an  alien  to 
possess  permanent  property  in  Canaan,  if  not  inherited  by  his 
wife.  The  servant  was  excluded  from  the  rights  of  citizenship; 
the  exceptions  in  a  legal  respect  will  be  noticed  under  the  proper 
head.  The  nonresident  foreigner  was  not  regarded  as  a  citizen ; 
but  he  stood  under  the  protection  of  the  laws,  and  enjoyed  con- 
siderable privileges  in  regard  to  foreign  commerce,  which  will 
be  noticed  under  its  proper  head. 

The  Union  of  the  Nation. — The  Israelitish  nation  consisted  of 
twelve  independent  tribes,  which  should  form  a  confederacy  with- 
out being  exposed  to  the  consequences  of  consolidation.  The 
means  to  secure  a  union  of  the  twelve  tribes  were  their  common 
descent,  language,  nationality,  and  destiny.  Besides  these, 
Moses  resorted  to  the  following  means : 

1.  The  national  sanctuary,  which  was  intended  to  be  the 
center  of  gravity  to  the  twelve  tribes ;  all  the  sacrifices  brought 
there  by  the  priests  were  on  behalf  of  the  whole  nation;  the 
law  directed  the  pious  Israelite  to  come  there  frequently  and 
pay  to  God  his  vows  and  his  free  will  gifts. 

2.  The  command  that  all  male  persons  should  appear  at  the 
place  where  the  tabernacle  stood,  three  times  annually,  on  the 
three  high  feasts  (Deutr.  xvi,  16).  These  three  annual  con- 
ventions were  eminently  calculated  to  maintain  fraternal 
feelings  among  the  tribes ;  and  Moses  was  entitled  to  predict, 
as  long  as  they  would  observe  that  command  none  should 
desire  to  violate  the  peace  of  their  land  or  to  invade  it  (Exod. 
xxxiv,  24). 

3.  The  commands  to  be  also  externally  distinguished  from 
the  neighboring  nations  by  circumcision,  by  wearing  fringes  on 
the  four  corners  of  the  cloak,  made  of  white  and  blue  threads 
(Numb,  xv,  37-41;  Deutr.  xxii,  12),  by  not  cutting  off  the 
hair  of  the  head  and  of  the  beard  (Levit.  xix,  27),  and  other 


PERIOD    I.  125 

marks.    Being  distinguished  and  separated  from  other  nations, 
they  were  obliged  to  form  a  close  union  among  themselves. 

4.  The  Levites,  whose  interests  were  closely  interwoven 
with  the  national  sanctuary,  the  maintenance  of  the  law,  and  a 
permanent  union  of  the  tribes,  resided  among  all  the  tribes  of 
Israel  in  forty-eight  cities,  in  order  to  holdup  a  communication 
with  all  of  them. 

5.  The  most  effectual  means  to  maintain  a  union  of  the 
tribes,  and  upon  which  Moses  most  securely  relied,  was,  that 
they  had  one  religion,  which  not  only  elevated  them  above  all 
the  neighboring  nations  in  ideas,  conceptions,  sentiments, 
manners,  customs  and  practices;  and  therefore  closely  con- 
nected them  among  themselves;  but  which  also  gave  one  law 
to  all  of  them,  the  practice  of  which  was  the  highest  religious 
duty,  and  one  national  government  invested  with  the  highest 
authority  by  God  himself,  the  invisible  king  of  the  nation, 
which  to  disobey  was  not  only  regarded  as  high  treason,  but 
also  as  the  most  abominable  revolt  against  God.  Moses 
founded  the  union  of  Israel  upon  the  religious  sentiments  of 
the  nation,  wherefore  he  predicted  to  them  all  sorts  of  national 
miseries  whenever  they  should  go  astray  after  other  gods;  for 
this  would  be  the  surest  step  to  the  dissolution  of  their  union. 
History  testifies  that  this  was  the  case.  Whenever  their 
religious  sentiments  were  corrupted,  their  national  union  and 
prosperity  naturally  must  have  expired,  since  the  basis  was 
removed,  its  vital  spark  was  extinguished.  These  obser- 
vations are  requisite,  in  order  to  understand  the  unlimited 
zeal  of  Moses,  and  of  the  prophets  after  him,  against  idolatry, 
and  their  predictions  of  misery  as  the  consequence  of  departing 
from  God. 

c.  The  Executive  Power. — God,  who  had  made  a  covenant 
with  Abraham,  and  promised  the  land  of  Canaan  to  him  and 
his  descendants;  who  had  redeemed  them  from  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  renewed  that  covenant  with  all  of  them  at  the  foot 
of  Mount  Sinai;  was  the  supreme  and  sovereign  ruler  of  the 
nation,  wherefore  the  government  was  a  theocracy.  But  he 
does  not  govern  directly,  he  chooses  a  man  as  Ms  instrument  to 


126  APPENDIX  TO 

stand  at  the  head  of  the  nation,  whom  to  obey  is  a  religious 
duty  (Exod.  xxiii,  20-25).  This  proxy  governor  stands  at  the 
head  of  all  the  departments  of  government;  he  is  the  chief  justice 
of  the  country,*  the  judgment  of  whom  to  disobey  is  an  offence 
of  high  treason,  and  is  punished  with  death  in  certain  cases. 
He  is  the  chief  of  the  national  council,!  which  dignity  he  may 
confer  upon  another  individual  (Exod.  xxiv,  14).  He  is 
commander  in  chief  of  the  army. J  He  may  ask  the  national 
oracle  in  matters  of  importance,  and  appoint  his  successor  by 
the  will  of  God  and  with  the  consent  of  the  people  (Numb. 
xxvii,  15-23),  as  Isaac  and  Jacob  did;  but  he  is  subject  to 
every  particular  of  the  law,  as  well  as  any  other  individual 
(Deutr.  xiii,  1-6).  If  the  appointment  of  a  king  should  be 
deemed  proper  and  advantageous  to  the  national  prosperity, 
this  might  be  done  by  the  representatives  of  the  nation,  who 
however  must  appoint  an  Israelite  and  not  a  foreigner.  The 
king  and  his  sons  who  succeed  him  should  not  cause  the  people 
to  return  to  Egypt;  he  should  not  have  a  large  harem,  that  he 
might  not  share  the  same  miserable  fate  with  other  eastern 
rulers  to  be  enfeebled  and  governed  by  his  wives;  nor  should 
he  accumulate  wealth,  that  he  make  not  wealth  the  aim  of  his 
life,  and  that  the  accumulated  wealth  be  not  the  means  of 
enslaving  the  people;  he  should  write  for  himself  a  copy  of 
Deuteronomy  from  the  original  in  the  hands  of  the  priests,  in 
order  that  he  might  know  his  duties,  and  pay  strict  obedience 
to  the  laws;  that  his  heart  be  not  proudly  raised  over  his 
brethren,  and  that  he  depart  not  from  the  law,  which  alone 
secured  to  him  the  possession  of  power  conferred  upon  him ; 
and  if  violating  the  law,  the  nation  had  a  right  to  depose  him, 
or  to  reject  his  son,  whom  he  might  appoint  to  succeed  him 
(Deutr.  xvii,  14-20).  The  king  has  neither  more  nor  less 
power  than  the  proxy  governor  or  republican  chief  of  the 
nation  as  described  before;  it  is  only  the  title  and  the  right  to 
appoint  his  son  to  succeed  him,   and  probably  also  a  greater 

*  Deutr.  i,  9-17;  vii,  6-13;  Exod.  xviii,  22. 

I  Numb,  xi,  17-,  xxvii,  12. 

J  Exod.  xvii,  8-13;  Numb,  xxxi,  6;  xxi,  32. 


PERIOD 


127 


external  pomp  and  the  necessary  yearly  allowance,  which 
distinguished  the  royal  dignity  from  that  of  the  republican 
chief. 

d.  The  National  Council. — The  national  council,  as  it  was 
noticed  already,  was  to  consist  of  two  distinct  bodies,  the  seventy 
elders,  and  the  edah  or  assembly.     It  is  more  than  likely  that 
the  fifty-seven  princes  of  the  families,  together  with  the  thirteen 
princes  of  the  tribes,  composed  the  senate  or  seventy  elders,  and 
the  princes  of  fatherhouses  of  the  different  tribes  composed  the 
assembly,  or  edah.     It  would  appear  from  Num.  xvi,  2,  that  the 
assembly  consisted  of  two  hundred  and  fifty-two  men,  besides 
the  representatives  of  the  Levites;  for  it   is  clear,  that  the 
seventy  elders  did  not  coincide  with  Korah,  as  they  went  with 
Moses  (ibid  23)  to  quench  the  revolution.     There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  high  priest  was  to  belong  ex  officio  to  the  senate, 
as  we   find  every   where  in  the  Pentateuch,   the  high  priest 
especially   mentioned   when   a   gathering   of    the    princes    is 
noticed.     The  duties  of   this  national  council  were:    1.  To 
assist  the  executive  chief  in  the  discharge  of  his  duties.     The 
council  determined  upon  the  measures  to  be  taken,  and  then, 
as  princes  of  different  ranks,  they  executed  that  will  under  the 
superintendence  of  the  chief  of  the  nation.     2.  The  determina- 
tion on  measures  to  be  taken  under   certain  circumstances  is 
a  legislative  duty,  with  which  also  they  were   entrusted  in  as 
far    as    the    fundamental    laws,    to    which    nothing    could    be 
added  or  diminished,  permitted  a  legislation.     3.  They  were 
the   expounders   of  the   law  in  judicial  affairs,   being  the  su- 
preme court  of  justice,  which  duty  devolved  upon  the  seventy 
elders  only,  and  not  upon  the  other  branch  of  the   national 
council.     The  whole  administration,    legislative,  judicial  and 
executive,  was  united  in  that  council,   over  which  the  chief  of 
the  nation  presided.     It  is  evident  from  Nunibers  xvi,  35,  and 
ibid  xxv,  4,  that  the  members  of  that  national  council  were  to 
be   subject  to  the  same  laws  as  every  other  individual;  the 
Mosaic  code  knows  of   no   exceptional  laws  in  favor  of   any 
individual.     Before  the  laws,  the  king,  and  the  meanest  of  his 
subjects  were  to  be  equal.     The  practice  noticed  in  the  Penta- 


128  APPENDIX    TO 

teuch  affirms  that  it  was  the  intention  of  Moses  to  confer  upon 
the  executive  chief  of  the  nation  the  power  of  convoking  the 
national  council;  for  which  sessions  no  time  is  fixed.  Still  it 
would  appear,  that  they  were  to  assemble  three  times  a  year 
during  the  high  feasts,  and  to  continue  their  sessions  as  long  as 
necessary. 

e.  The  Prophets  and  the  Priests. — The  concentration  of 
power  in  the  national  council  might  have  become  fatal  to  the 
liberties  of  the  nation,  if  they  had  not  been  secured  by  a 
written  law,  which  was  the  unalterable  will  of  the  supreme 
ruler  of  the  nation,  God.  This  law  was  then  the  sole  guaranty 
given  to  the  nation.  Therefore  it  was  necessary  that  this 
law  be  properly  guarded  against  all  interpolations  and  viola- 
tions. This  was  to  be  the  duty  of  the  priests  and  the  prophets. 
The  priests  and  Levites  were  the  ministers  of  the  Supreme 
Ruler  of  the  nation,  whose  national  residence  was  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation,  where  his  substitutes,  the  national 
council,  met,  through  whom  he  spoke  to  the  people.  There 
was  the  written  law  deposited  in  the  most  sacred  place  of  the 
tabernacle,  which  none  but  the  high  priests  were  permitted  to 
enter.  In  this  way  the  letter  of  the  law  was  guarded  against 
interpolations  and  violations.  While  the  national  council  had 
the  duty  to  expound  this  law  for  the  community  at  large,  it 
was  the  duty  of  the  priests  and  Levites  to  interpret  it  to  the 
individuals.  While  the  former  were  charged  with  the  duty  to 
direct  the  actions  of  the  community  according  to  this  law;  the 
latter  were  charged  to  prepare  the  individuals  to  such  actions, 
and  among  those  individuals  was  the  executive  chief  as  well  as 
every  representative  of  the  people.  Still  if  one  not  being  a 
Levite  was  inspired  by  God,  and  exhorted  those  who  deserted 
the  law,  be  it  king,  priest  or  soldier,  he  must  be  heard,  and 
his  person  must  be  inviolable,  whoever  would  not  hear  him 
God  would  punish.  But  if  even  a  prophet  wrought  miracles, 
or  foretold  future  events,  but  he  spoke  against  the  law,  he 
should  die.  He  was  guilty  of  high  treason;  for  the  law  is  the 
expressed  will  of  the  Supreme  Ruler  of  the  nation  and  is 
unalterable;  still  only  the   senate  could  try  and  condemn  him. 


PERIOD    I.  J29 

While  it  was  the  duty  of  the  priests  to  guard  the  letter  of  the 
law,  it  was  the  duty  of  the  prophets  to  guard  the  spirit  of  the 
law  against  violations  and  innovations.  While  the  former  had 
to  wait  until  the  people  came  to  them,  the  latter  was  to  come 
to  the  people,  into  the  mansion  of  the  rich  and  powerful,  as 
into  the  hut  of  the  poor  and  feeble;  he  must  be  heard,  if 
speaking  at  public  places  or  to  private  individuals ;  he  is  the 
special  messenger  of  the  Supreme  Ruler.  So  the  national 
government,  priests  and  prophets  were  to  form  a  check  upon 
each  other,  that  the  law  be  preserved  and  practiced,  the 
liberties  and  rights  of  the  people  properly  guarded,  and  no 
preponderating  power  endanger  the  prosperity  of  the  nation. 
It  is  true,|that  there  were  priests  and  prophets  in  Egypt;  but 
the  priests  were  the  lords  of  the  people,  and  the  prophets  were 
to  shield  the  priests  and  the  king's  power.  With  Moses, 
however,  it  was  different,  the  priest  and  the  prophet  were  to 
guard  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  people. 

/.  The  Judiciary, — "  Judges  and  officers  shalt  thou  appoint 
unto  thee  in  all  thy  gates,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  gives  unto 
thee,  unto  thy  tribes  {Deutr.  16,  18).  These  last  words  evi- 
dently belong  after  the  words  thy  gates ;  which  is  to  say  that 
they  should  appoint  judges  and  officers  for  each  town,  and  for 
each  tribe,  so  that  it  was  intended  for  each  town  to  have  a 
common  court  of  justice,  and  each  tribe  to  have  an  instance 
court,  while  the  whole  country  was  to  have  but  one  supreme 
court  (ibid  17,  8-10),  as  mentioned  before.  The  number  of 
judges  is  not  prescribed  in  the  Pentateuch.  Tradition  tells  us 
that  a  common  court  was  composed  of  no  less  than  three  or 
more  men,  and  the  instance  court  was  composed  of  no  less 
than  twenty-three  men,  while  the  supreme  court  was  composed 
of  seventy  men  as  was  stated  before.  Josephus  (Antiqu.  b.  iv. 
c.  viii,  14)  informs  us  of  seven  judges  and  two  Levites  for 
each  town.  This  does  not  contradict  the  tradition,  which 
mentions  but  three  judges;  because  the  number  is  not  limited 
to  three;  it  only  says,  there  should  not  be  less  than  three. 
But  as  regards  the  two  Levites  allotted  to  each  judge,  we  must 
remark  that  this  was  a  matter  of  impossibility;  because  Moses 
9 


ISO  APPENDIX    TO 

ordered  thai;  separate  cities  should  be  given  unto  them,   and 
the  number  of  Levites  was  by  no  means  large  enough  to  do  the 
service  in  the   temple,  to  care  for  their  own   cities,    and  to 
attend  too  to  every  judge  in  Israel.     The   matter  appears   to 
us  to  have   been  so.     While  the  princes  of  tribes  and  of  the 
families  composed   the  supreme   court,   the   representatives  cf 
the  people,  viz:  the  princes  of  the  fatherhouses,  composed  the 
highest  judicial  authority  of  each  tribe,  consequently  also  the 
instance  court.     There  were  two  hundred  and  fifty-two  repre- 
sentatives, which  gives  twenty-one  for  each  tribe.     If  we  add 
to  this  number  two  Levites,  who  represented    their  cities  in 
each    tribe,    and    the    number    of  judges   in    each    tribe    were 
twenty-three,  which  number  custom  has  preserved  to  the  end 
of  the  Israelitish  commonwealth,     It  is   most  likely  that  those 
twenty-three  judges  formed  also  twenty-three    common  courts 
in  different  parts  of  their  respective  country,  assisted  by  three 
other  judges  for  each   such   court,  because   the    custom   main- 
tained that  sixty-nine  candidates,  three   times  the  number  of 
the    judges    set  with    the    instance    court  in  all  its    sessions. 
But  Moses  provides  that  in  case  there  should  be   more   cities 
than  princes  of   fatherhouses,   they   should  any  how   appoint 
judges,  and  officers.     It  therefore  appears   that  there  was  but 
one  set  of  officers,  who  were  charged  with  all  the  duties  in 
the  commonwealth,    executive,   judicial   and  legislative;  that 
each  tribe  had  twenty-three  common  courts,  presided  over  by 
the  twenty-one  representatives  of  the  people  and   two   Levites, 
who,  as   a  body,  formed   the   instance    court  of  the  tribe,  at 
which  the  sixty-nine  judges  of  the  common  courts  were  asses- 
sors,   while   the  prince  of  each   tribe  and  the  princes   of  the 
families  were  the  executive  officers  of  the  tribe,  who,  in  a  body, 
formed  the  supreme  court  of  the  nation.     The  executive  officers 
of  the  people    attached  to   the  judges  are  called  by  Moses, 
shoterim;    so    also   are    the    seventy    elders    called    shoterim 
(Numb,  xi,  16),  because  they  were  composed   by  the  executive 
officers  of  the  different  tribes,  the  princes  of  the  tribes,  and  of 
the   families,     There    can    be    no   doubt  that  those  exeuctive 
officers   had  to  dispose  of  a  number  of  subordinate   shoterim, 


PERIOD    I.  131 

who,  probably,  corresponded  with  our  police  officers,  which 
offices  were  entrusted  to  the  Levites,  who  were  at  the  same 
time  the  writers  on  the  different  courts,  and  the  national 
guard,  as  noticed  before. 

The  words  of  Moses  to  the  judges  are,  "  Thou  shalt  not 
wrest  judgment,  thou  shalt  not  respect  persons,  neither  take  a 
gift:  for  a  gift  does  blind  the  eyes  of  the  wise,  and  pervert  the 
words  of  the  righteous.  That  which  is  altogether  just  thou 
shalt  follow,  that  thou  mayest  live  and  inherit  the  land  which 
the  Lord  thy  Godgiveth  thee."  (Deutr.  xvi,  19,  20).  "  Hear 
the  causes  between  your  brethren,  and  judge  righteously 
between  every  man  and  his  brother,  and  the  stranger  that  is 
with  him.  Ye  shall  not  respect  persons  in  judgment,  but  ye 
shall  hear  the  small  as  well  as  the  great ;  ye  shall  not  be  afraid 
for  the  face  of  man,  for  the  judgment  is  God's  (ibid  i,  16,  17). 
"  Ye  shall  do  no  unrighteousness  in  judgment;  thou  shalt  not 
respect  the  person  of  the  poor,  nor  honor  the  person  of  the 
mighty;  but  in  righteousness  shalt  thou  judge  thy  neighbor" 
(Leviticus  xix,  15).  In  regard  to  their  personal  qualifications 
to  the  office,  it  is  remarked,  "  thou  shalt  select  out  of  the  peo- 
ple noble  men,  such  as  fear  God,  men  of  truth,  hating  their 
own  gain-disenterested,  (Exod.  xviii,  21),  to  which  it  is  added 
(Deutr,  i,  13),  that  they  should  be  wise,  intelligent  and 
learned.  While  in  Egypt  the  priests  were  judges.  Moses  sur- 
rounded the  judges  with  the  sacred  nimbus  of  the  priest,  com- 
manding respect  for  the  man  or  the  body  dispensing  justice  in 
the  name  of  God. 

g.  The  Military. — It  appears  from  Numbers  i,  3;  xxvi,  2, 
that  it  was  made  the  duty  of  every  man  above  the  age  of 
twenty  to  serve  in  the  army  whenever  his  services  were  re- 
quired., but  no  means  of  compulsion  are  mentioned.  The  tradi- 
tion tells  us,  that  such  was  the  duty  of  every  man  in  case  of 
invasion ;  but  in  order  to  invade  another  country,  an  especial 
permission  of  the  senate  was  required.  The  following  ordi- 
nances must  be  noticed.  The  shoterim  (the  executive  officers 
of  the  tribes)  brought  all  arm-bearing  men  to  the  spot  fixed  for 
the  meeting.     Here,  after  the  priest,  appointed  to  the  purpose, 


132  APPENDIX   TQ 

had  addressed  and  encouraged  the  men,  the  above  named  offi- 
cers addressed  them,  that  every  one  that  had  built  a  new 
house,  and  not  dedicated  it;  who  had  planted  a  new  vineyard 
and  did  not  eat  of  its  fruits;  who  had  betrothed  a  woman  and 
did  not  marry  her;  who  was  afraid  or  cowardly,  should  leave 
the  army.  After  those  who  wished  to  do  so  had  left  the  army, 
the  shoterim  appointed  the  subaltern  officers  of  the  army 
(Deutr.  xx,  1-9)  which  no  doubt  they  could  occupy  themselves; 
so  as  the  executive  head  of  the  whole  nation  cither  in  person 
or  by  a  proxy  had  the  chief  command  over  the  army.  No 
assault  upon  a  city  could  be  made  unless  terms  of  peace  were 
offered  and  refused  previously  (ibid  xx,  11,  12);  nothing  of  the 
enemy's  property  should  be  destroyed,  unless  being  indispen- 
sably necessary  (ibid  xx,  19,  20);  no  rape  should  be  committed, 
and  who  seduces  a  woman  must  take  her  in  marriage  (ibid  xxi, 
10-14).  War  is  waged  only  against  those  who  bear  arms 
(ibid  xx,  13,  14)  but  not  against  women  and  children.  The 
camp  must  be  kept  clean  (ibid  xxiii,  10-15). 

h.  Exceptions. — Before  we  conclude  this  head  we  must  yet 
notice  the  following  exceptions:  "When  a  man  has  taken  a 
new  wife;  he  shall  not  go  out  to  war,  neither  shall  he  be 
charged  with  any  (public)  business ;  he  shall  be  free  at  home 
one  year,  and  shall  cheer  up  his  wife  which  he  has  taken  " 
(Deutr.  xxiv,  5).  Because  no  law  can  be  ordained  to  oppose 
natural  affections,  and  a  man  just  married  can  not  serve  the 
public  with  a  settled  mind.  His  inclinations  draw  him  so 
much  towards  his  wife,  that^an  earnest  devotion  to  the  exer- 
cise of  public  duties  could  not  be  expected  of  him.  "  He  that  is 
wounded  in  the  stones,  or  hath  his  privy  member  cut  off,  shall 
not  enter  into  the  congregation  of  the  Lord  ?'  (ibid  xxiii,  1), 
i.  e.  he  shall  not  have  the  right  of  sitting  in  the  national  coun- 
cil. Such  diseases  are  the  consequence  of  an  impure  and  im- 
moral life,  which  indeed  makes  a  man  unfit  for  society,  as  mind 
and  body  are  enfeebled,  the  wildest  passions  unchained,  human 
nature  degraded,  female  chastity  despisable  to  him,  and  his 
mind  knows  but  of  one  kind  of  thought,  to  satisfy  his  brutal 
passions. 


PERIOD    I.  133 

"A  mamzer  shall  not  enter  into  the  congregation  of  the 
Lord;  even  to  his  tenth  gone ration  shall  he  not  enter  into  the 
congregation  of  the  Lord"  (ibid  xxiii,  2),  i.  e.  he  shall  not  be 
permitted  to  sit  in  the  national  council.  The  word  mamzer  is 
rendered  in  the  authorized  version  bastard ;  but  this  is  not  the 
meaning  of  the  term;  it  signifies  a  child  begotten  in  one  of 
the  prohibited  connections,  as  specified  in  Leviticus  xviii,  6, 
23.*  This  law  was  calculated  not  only  to  deter  from  the 
crime  of  incest,  against  which  Moses  had  to  be  extremely 
severe,  because  they  came  from  Egypt,  where  the  most  horrid 
incest  was  practiced,  especially  during  the  reign  of  the  Hyksos; 
but  it  was  also  accommodated  to  the  family  divisions  of  the 
nation,  to  none  of  which  he  could  properly  be  reckoned  who 
-was  born  in  incest,  because  father  and  mother  themselves  for- 
feited by  the  very  act  the  right  of  citizenship. 

III.  THE  THEORY  OF  THE  LAW. 
While  the  apostles  of  the  physical  sciences  are  engaged  to 
classify  observations,  to  abstract  their  laws  and  to  connect 
them  into  systems,  it  is  the  province  of  legislators  to  devise 
laws  which  should  be  able  to  suit  the  society  for  which  they 
were  intended,  and  guide  it  nearest  to  the  ideal  of  legal  order. 
The  ancient  legislators  were  absolute  inventors,  producing 
laws  to  form  society.  One  of  those  legislators,  altogether 
unlike  the  rest  of  them,  was  Moses.  While  the  others  gave 
laws  when  their  people  required  them ;  Moses  wrested  a  people 
from  the  embrace  of  tyranny  in  order  to  give  them  laws. 
Most  of  the  ancient  lawgivers  required  a  divine  sanction  to 
their  laws.  The  legislator  of  Sparta  received  divine  sanction 
to  his  laws  by  the  Sybille,  and  the  legislator  of  Rome  obtained 
that  favor  from  the  Nymph  Egeria ;  Moses  appeared  before  his 
people  as  the  messenger  of  God  himself.  While  other  legisla- 
tors based  their  laws  upon  the  religions  of  their  countries,  the 
Hebrew  legislator  directed  his  laws  against  the  religion  which 
the  vulgar  mass  had  brought  from  Egypt;  and  therefore  while 
the  former  employed  in  their  service  all  popular  superstitions 

*  Kidushin  75,  b;  Ycbamalh  14.  a. 


134  APPENDIX    TO 

and  inherited  prejudices,  Moses  warred  against,  all  of  them. 
Although  legislation  in  general  seems  to  have  been  to  the 
ancients  a  new  creation,  yet,  it  is  evident,  that  they  must  have 
had  some  foundation  upon  which  to  erect  their  new  edifice;  for 
man  is  no  creator.  This  foundation  was  cosmogony,  which 
also  was  the  basis  of  all  ancient  religions.  It  brought  the  men 
of  antiquity  to  an  observation  of  natural  phenomena,  thereby 
to  enable  them  to  comprehend  the  work  of  creation.  While 
superficial  observers,  gifted  with  a  lofty  imagination,  lost 
themselves  in  the  illusions  of  cosmolatry,  and  the  philosophers 
erected  physical  systems  by  the  aid  of  induction  and  general- 
ization, the  legislators  observed  the  laws  by  which  this  material 
universe  is  preserved  in  a  state  of  perfect  order,  and  by 
reasoning  from  analogy  they  produced  the  systems  of  laws, 
which  should  hold  society  in  a  state  of  legal  order.  Therefore 
all  the  ancient  legislators,  from  Scandinavia  to  China,  commenced 
their  systems  of  laws  with  the  history  of  creation.  The  art 
of  primeval  legislation  consisted  in  the  observation  of  nature's 
laws,  and  in  applying  analogous  laws  to  the  government  of 
society.  The  laws  of  nature  were,  to  the  ancients,  the  direct 
manifestations  of  the  Deity,  wherefore  their  laws  correspond 
in  every  particular  with  their  conceptions  of  the  Deity. 
Inverting  the  terms,  we  come  to  the  conclusion,  that  their 
indistinct  conceptions  of  the  Deity  prove  their  indistinct 
conceptions  of  the  laws  of  nature;  consequently  their  laws, 
which  were  deduced  by  a  reasoning  from  analogy  from  the 
same  laws  of  nature,  must  have  been  equally  indistinct  and 
imperfect  as  their  conception  of  the  Deity  was.  On  the  other 
side,  we  are  entitled  to  the  conclusion  that  the  distinct  concep- 
tions of  the  Deity  by  Moses  is  a  proof  of  his  distinct 
conceptions  of  the  laws  of  nature,  as  it  is  indeed  remarked  in 
several  passages  of  the  Pentateuch,*  consequently  his  laws 
must  be  the  best  among  all  the  judicial  productions  of  antiquity. 
Investigating  the  particulars,  we  find  that  Moses  also  begun 
his  books  with  the  history  of  creation;  but  he  at  once  rejected 
all  that  was    fabulous    in   the  cosmogony    of    other   nations. 

*  Exodus  vi,  3-,  xxxiii,  19-23;  Numb,  xii,  7;  Deutr.  xxxiv,  10, 


PERIOD    I.  135 

reducing  the  whole  almost  to  this  one  principle,  "  God  created 
the  world.*'  He  rejected  all  the  interior  deities,  the  stories  of 
the  previous  creations  and  destructions  of  the  innumerable 
races  of  gods  and  giants,  dwarfs,  elphs,  revolting  spirits,  not 
even  mentioning  the  creation  of  angels.  Each  day's  work  of 
the  creation  which  he  described,  manifests  decidedly  the 
intention  of  dethroning  another  god  of  the  heathens,  which  is 
most  visibly  expressed  in  his  stories  of  the  serpent,  the  first 
fratricide,  and  of  the  rainbow;  with  him  no  supernatural 
beings  remained  aside  of  the  one  creator,  governor  and  pre- 
server of  the  universe.  Man  was  to  him  the  image  of  God,  a 
reflection  of  the  supreme  intellect;  no  demi-gods  were  placed 
between  him  and  God,  he  was  the  most  accomplished  of  the 
created  beings,  the  son  of  God,  standing  in  direct  communica- 
tion with  the  Supreme  Being,  who  speaks  to  man  in  dreams, 
visions,  from  face  to  face,  directly  through  the  mind  of  man, 
and  indirectly  through  nature  and  history.  So  Moses  under- 
stood human  nature,  and  therefore,  while  other  lawgivers, 
knowing  of  demi-gods,  deified  heroes,  superior  and  inferior 
beings  in  the  creation  and  government  of  nature,  recognized 
castes  in  society,  and  drew  a  strong  line  of  demarcation 
between  the  governing  and  the  governed,  and  the  different 
mediating  classes  between  them;  Moses,  altogether  rejecting  the 
ideas  of  superiority  and  inferiority  aside  of  God,  could  know 
of  a  self-governing  society  only,  whose  officers  were  not 
superior  to  the  rest  of  the  citizens.  While  other  legislators, 
acknowledging  the  sanctity  of  idols  and  oracles,  through  which 
the  gods  communicated  with  the  priests,  sanctioned  a  hierarchy; 
Moses,  acknowledging  only  a  direct  communication  between 
God  and  man,  could  acknowledge  a  theocracy  only,  rejecting 
hierarchy  altogether.  While  other  legislators  were  obliged  to 
support  their  respective  systems  by  commanding  respect  before 
the  priests  and  fear  before  the  gods;  Moses  could  and  did 
support  his  system  by  the  command  of  love  to  God,  the 
consequence  of  which  must  be  self-esteem,  and  love  to  his 
fellow-men,  commanding  respect  but  before  the  law  and  its 
administrators.     While  the  heathens  were  slaves  of  their  gods. 


136  APPENDIX    TO 

priests,  and  rulers,  and  human  nature  was  secondary  even  to 
the  irrational  idol,  Moses  elevated  man  to  his  true  dignity  and 
right  position,  basing  the  whole  of  his  system  upon  the  self- 
esteem  of  man  as  the  being  next  to  God.  He  at  once  pro- 
claimed liberty,  both  political,  civil  and  religious,  and  what 
was  most  important,  liberty  of  thought,  on  which  wc  shall 
treat  under  the  head  of  religion. 

Experience  taught  him,  that  man  must  be  educated  to 
appreciate  the  value  of  truth  and  of  liberty,  wherefore  he  not 
only  recommended  to  them  to  educate  their  children  in  the  law 
and  to  teach  them  diligently  the  words  and  principles  of  truth 
(Deatr.  vi,  7;  xi,  19);  but  he  positively  demanded  the  total 
extinction  of  every  thing  that  could  mislead  the  mind  into 
fictitious  or  superstitious  ideas,  and  he  set  the  penalty  of  death 
upon  every  such  practice. 

Human  nature  is  so  constructed,  that  man  is  never  satisfied 
with  the  enjoyment  of  the  present,  nor  is  he  content  with  the 
recollections  of  the  past ;  he  must  have  a  hope  resting  on  the 
bosom  of  future,  for  which  he  longs,  a  hope  which  he  can  not 
realize;  he  must  have  an  ideal,  by  which  his  endeavors  are 
inspired,  and  which  enlivens  his  energies.  If  man  be  deprived 
of  his  ideal,  he  becomes  a  sensual,  pleasure-loving  and  inactive 
being,  to  whom  enjoyment  itself  gives  but  little  satisfaction. 
Nations  are  composed  of  individuals.  What  is  true  of  indi- 
viduals must  also  be  true  of  nations.  A  nation  must  have  an 
ideal,  if  it  shall  maintain  itself  upon  the  lofty  summits  of 
national  strength,  morality,  energy  and  inspiration.  The 
Mosaic  legislation  gave  an  ideal  to  Israel,  the  noblest  ever 
given  to  a  nation.  It  was  every  way  calculated  to  arouse 
their  energies,  and  to  hold  them  above  the  level  of  the  roaring 
ocean  of  mutations.  They  were  told  to  be  a  nation  of  priests, 
the  champions  of  truth,  the  consecrated  servants  of  the  Lord, 
who  were  charged  to  combat  against  fiction,  and  to  bear  the 
banner  of  truth.  They  were  not  charged  to  fulfill  their  mission 
by  the  force  of  the  sword,  they  should  obey  and  practice  the 
law  of  the  Lord  in  their  own  country,  and  so  convince  the 
nations  by  their  own  prosperity,   that  those  laws  were  wise 


PERIOD    I,  137 

and  good,  and  that  they  were  "  a  wise  and  intelligent  people.'' 
Therefore  the  most  severe  punishment  for  civil  crimes  was 
careth,  "to  be  cut  off  from  the  community  of  Israel,"  to  have 
no  part  on  the  ideal  of  the  nation;  and  the  most  eminent  act 
could  only  be  to  approach  nearest  to  the  national  ideal.  In 
order  to  reduce  these  theories  to  practice  it  becomes  necessary : 

1.  That  all  citizens  be  perfectly  equal  before  the  law,  and 
equally  concerned  in  the  government  of  the  nation.  We  have 
already  introduced  our  readers  into  the  Mosaic  constitution  in 
as  far  as  these  points  are  concerned. 

2.  To  bestow  proper  care  for  the  maintenance  of  the  public 
health  and  morals.  A  demoralized  man  knows  no  self-respect. 
Liberty,  without  self-respect,  is  a  phantom.  A  sickly  man  is 
not  only  unlit  to  render  services  to  society,  but  also  to  take 
proper  care  of  himself.  Besides  this,  it  can  not  be  denied,  but 
that  physical  disease  reacts  unfavorably  upon  the  moral  and 
mental  energies.  What  is  true  of  individuals  must  be  true  of 
a  nation. 

3.  To  maintain  the  equilibrium  of  material  wealth  among 
the  citizens.  Extreme  poverty  is  frequently  the  cause  of  crime, 
of  the  loss  of  self-respect,  of  an  undue  submissiveness,  and  of 
the  degradation  of  the  mental  faculties.  Extreme  opulence  is 
no  less  fraught  with  corruption,  and  is  dangerous  to  the 
liberties  of  the  people. 

4.  To  secure  the  life,  limbs,  honor  and  property  of  every 
individual  against  undue  interference,  in  order  to  prevent 
physical  strength  from  usurping  the  place  of  mental  and  legal 
liberty. 

5.  To  have  a  fixed  code  of  penal  laws,  to  secure  society 
against  the  violation  of  the  law  by  self-willed  individuals,  and 
to  protect  the  criminal  against  the  despotism  of  society  or 
individual  courts  of  justice. 

6.  To  provide  means  for  reinstating  the  criminal  in  his  rights 
and  duties  after  he  has  given  satisfaction  to  offended  society. 

The  Mosaic  law  is  the  realization  of  these  principles  corres- 
ponding to  the  state  of  society  as  Moses  found  the  Israelites. 
We  shall  give  our  readers  some  particulars  in   this  respect* 


138  APPENDIX    TO 

although  it  would  be  against  the  plan  of  this  book  to  treat  the 
subject  as  extensively  as  it  indeed  requires  it,  to  appreciate 
fully  the  Mosaic  legislation.  We  must  refer  our  readers  to 
the  large  works  on  the  subject  by  Michaelis,  Saalschutz,  Salva- 
dor and  others. 

IV.  HEALTH. 
"And  he  said,  If  thou  wilt  diligently  hearken  to  the  voice  of 
the  Lord  thy  God,  and  wilt  do  that  which  is  right  in  his  eyes, 
and  wilt  give  ear  to  his  commandments,  and  wilt  keep  all  his 
statutes,  I  will  put  none  of  those  diseases  upon  thee  which  I 
have  brought  upon  the  Egyptians:  for  I  the  Lord  am  thy 
physician"  (Exodus  xv,  26).  "  If  thou  wilt  not  observe  to 
do  all  the  words  of  this  law  which  are  written  in  this  book; 
to  fear  this  glorious  and  fearful  name,  the  Lord  thy  God:  then 
the  Lord  will  render  peculiar  thy  plagues,  and  the  plagues  of 
thy  seed,  plagues  great,  and  of  long  continuance;  and  sicknesses 
sore,  and  of  long  continuance.  And  he  will  bring  back  upon 
thee  all  the  diseases  of  Egypt,  of  which  thou  wast  afraid;  and 
they  shall  cleave  unto  thee.  Also  every  sickness  and  every 
plague,  which  is  not  written  in  the  book  of  this  law  will  the 
Lord  bring  upon  thee,  until  thou  be  destroyed"  (Deutr.  xxviii, 
58-61).  These  passages,  and  many  others,  tell  us  in  plain 
language,  that  the  Mosaic  law  intended  to  maintain  the  public 
health,  without  which  a  nation  can  not  develop  its  capacities, 
or  'maintain  its  position  among  the  nations ;  nor  can  the  indi- 
vidual be  happy,  and  required  to  do  his  public  and  private 
duties.  The  laws  mentioned  already  were  calculated  to  have 
a  beneficent  bearing  upon  public  health.  The  whole  of  the 
land  should  be  divided  into  equal  lots,  in  order  that  the  whole 
of  it  be  properly  cultivated,  and  swamps  and  other  sources  of 
diseases  be  destroyed. 

The  mode  of  employment  to  which  they  were  addicted,  the 
agricultural  and  pastoral  life,  to  which  there  were  attached 
warlike  exercises  as  the  duty  of  every  citizen;  the  proper 
change  of  labor  and  rest,  in  both  of  which  the  female  sex  took 
their  part;  the  impossibility  of  the  existence  of  extreme 
poverty;  the  national  and  family  feasts  to  gladden  the  heart. 


PERIOD    I.  139 

and  to  cheer  up  the  unhappy  and  needy;  the  three  annual 
travels  to  the  place  which  God  would  choose,  and  many  other 
laws,  were  eminently  calculated  to  preserve  the  public  health. 
As  it  is  an  unquestionable  fact,  that  the  si  ah-  of  mind  has  a 
powerful  influence  on  the  state  of  the  body,  it  may  be  con- 
tended, that  the  free  government,  the  sure  protection  of  the 
law,  the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  country,  the  confi- 
dence which  the  free  citizen  feels  in  his  country  and  her  insti- 
tutions, the  self  esteem  which  makes  him  bold  and  fearless; 
the  trust  which  he  feels  in  the  justice  of  Providence,  and  the 
consciousness  of  his  own  value  as  a  member  of  society,  exer- 
cise a  favorable  influence  upon  his  state  of  health,  if  not  other 
circumstances  violently  counteract  it.  Immorality,  intem- 
perance, irritated  passions,  unsatiated  desires,  and  lasting 
excitement,  are  the  most  common  and  furious  foes  of  health. 
The  laws  of  Moses  calculated  to  oppose  those  unnatural  states 
of  the  mind,  are  too  numerous  to  be  enumerated  here.  His 
strict  laws  in  regard  to  chastity,  and  on  the  other  side,  the 
admission  of  bigamy  to  soften  the  passions ;  the  sanctity  which 
he  gave  to  the  matrimonial  institution,  and  then  again  the 
prohibition  of  sexual  intercourse  during  certain  periods ;  the 
value  which  he  attached  to  the  enjoyment  of  the  products  of 
the  land,  and  the  prohibitory  laws  in  regard  to  eating,  drinking 
and  dressing,  all  had  aside  of  other  objects  also  this  one  in 
view.  The  food  is  another  cause  of  either  health  or  disease. 
Vegetable  food  is  the  best  support  of  animal  life.  It  not  only 
preserves  the  energies  of  the  digestive  organs,  but  it  also  calms 
the  sensitive  organs,  and  prevents  violent  irritability  and  the 
inflammation  of  the  passions.  The  enjoyment  of  milk  may  be 
mentioned  in  addition,  which,  while  being  nutrimental  also 
operates  eminently  to  the  same  effect.  If  anyone  is  acquainted 
with  the  peasantry  of  the  interior  of  Europe,  he  is  satisfied 
that  our  observations  are  founded  upon  facts.  Moses  praised 
the  land  of  Palestine  as  flowing  with  milk  and  honey;  he 
continually  praised  the  vegetable  products  of  the  land;  he 
spoke  but  of  eating  bread,  giving  a  decided  preference  to  vege- 
table over  animal  food,  and  to  milk  over  wine.    But  he  did  not 


140  APPENDIX    TO 

prohibit  the  enjoyment  of  wine;  he  only  stigmatized  drunken- 
ness as  an  abominable  vice.  He  did  not  prohibit  the  use  of 
animal  food;  but  he  prescribed  laws  as  regards  the  health  of 
the  animal,  the  like  of  which  existed  also  in  Egypt,  where 
special  officers  watched  over  those  laws.  An  animal  which 
died  of  itself,  or  was  torn  by  another,  was  therefore  prohibited 
to  be  eaten.  The  blood,  prohibited  already  to  Noah,  and  which 
gave  rise  to  several  cruel  customs;  the  internal  fat,  which  is 
very  destructive  to  the  digestive  organs,  and  which  was  sacri- 
ficed on  the  Lord's  altar,  were  likewise  prohibited.  As 
regards  the  classes  of  animals,  which  he  distinguished  as  food 
for  human  beings,  it  must  be  remarked,  that  Noah  did  already 
know  of  clean  and  unclean  animals,  and  that  Abraham,  accord- 
ing to  his  sacrifices,  must  have  known  of  the  same  distinctions. 
It  appears,  therefore,  that  Moses  did  but  renew  an  ancient  and 
established  custom  of  the  nation.  It  must  be  considered,  that 
we  stand  much  too  far  from  that  age,  in  order  to  ascertain  all 
the  climatical  influences,  the  predominant  diseases  and  other 
circumstances  which  influenced  the  legislator  in  the  adoption 
of  this  law.  Some  sanitary  causes  must  have  been  at  the 
bottom;  as  this  was  the  case  with  the  swine,  which  was  greatly 
abhorred  in  Egypt,  because  the  enjoyment  of  that  meat  pro- 
duced cutaneous  diseases;  and  the  fish  kinds,  which  Moses 
prohibited,  which  produced  cholera  morbus,  and  still  do  so  in 
warm  climates. 

Next  to  the  food,  is  cleanliness  and  the  frequent  application 
of  cold  water,  which  exercise  a  favorable  influence  on  the 
health;  which  Moses  made  an  actual  law,  supported  by  a 
religious  awe.  It  is  well  known,  that  the  Egyptian  priests  set 
in  this  respect  the  example  to  Moses,  who  extended  the  law  of 
cleanliness  and  of  frequent  application  of  cold  water  over  the 
whole  of  his  nation,  which  was  to  him  a  kingdom  of  priests. 

The  next  care  of  the  law  in  this  respect  must  be  to  protect 
the  community  against  contagious  diseases,  which  were  less 
numerous  then  than  in  our  days.  Moses,  it  would  appear, 
only  knew  of  one  kind  of  disease  of  that  nature,  the  leprosy 
mentioned  in  the  Bible,  which  is  subdivided  into  some  parti- 


PER  TOD    I.  141 

cular  cases.  This  leprosy  is  supposed  to  be  the  Egyptian 
elephantiasis,  which  disfigures  the  unhappy  being  subjected  to 
it.  Moses  took  proper  care  not  only  to  guard  the  community 
against  it,  but  also  to  cure  the  unfortunate  patient  in  hospitals 
located  out  of  the  towns.  The  nature  of  the  leprosy  on  clothes 
and  houses,  as  well  as  of  the  disease  of  males  called  running 
issue  (Levit.  xv,  2),  has  not  been  ascertained.  Probably,  they 
have  long  ago  expired;  still  the  precaution  taken  in  regard  to 
them  by  the  law  of  Moses,  convince  us  that  they  were  of  a 
contagious  nature.  I.  Salvador  (torn,  iii,  b.  ix,  c.  3),  finds 
a  connection  between  the  leprosy  of  houses  and  clothes,  men- 
tioned by  Moses,  in  the  following  statement  of  El-Makrisy, 
"  In  the  year  791  a.  c,  the  worms  which  devoured  woollen 
stuffs,  increased  formidably  in  the  vicinity  of  Cairo.  A  reliable 
man  assured  me,  that  these  animals  destroyed  fifteen  hundred 
pieces  of  such  stuff  of  his.  Surprised  by  such  an  unlikely  state- 
ment, I  precautiously  observed,  according  to  my  custom,  every 
object  which  I  deemed  conductive  to  truth  in  this  respect,  and 
I  was  convinced  that  the  statement  was  no  exaggeration  of  the 
fact.  In  the  year  821  a.  c,  these  creatures  ate  on  the  walls  of 
the  houses,  and  perfectly  hollowed  the  beams  of  the  roofs..  The? 
proprietors  destroyed  the  houses  not  yet  attacked  by  these 
creatures,  and  deserted  that  region  of  the  country."*  It  is 
possible  enough,  that  the  disease  of  cloths  and  houses  described 
by  Moses,  were  but  symptoms  of  the  approach  of  those  crea- 
tures ;    and  his  means  were  of  a  preventive  nature. 

The  officers  of  public  health  and  the  physicians  in  general 
were  the  Levites  (Deutr.  xxiv,  8),  who  were  intended  to  be  the 
literary  class  of  society;  although  this  was  not  an  exclusive 
privilege  of  theirs,  it  was  made  the  duty  of  every  Israelite  to 
study  the  law,  with  which  all  other  scientific  branches  stood 
in  connection. 

The  measures  prescribed  by  Moses  in  regard  to  contagious 
diseases  were  to  prevent  the  coming  in  contact  with  objects 
which   might  impart  the  venomous  matter,  and  to  resort  to 

*  Translation  by  Etienn*  Guatremere.  Vide  M.  du  Bois-Aymc  sur  it  sejoui 
des  Hcbreux  en  Egypte. 


142  APPENDIX    TO 

preventive  means  if  such  a  contact  had  occurred.  The  general 
application  of  these  two  measures  appeared  to  our  modern 
physicians  so  wise,  that  they  were  obliged  to  confess  that  the 
particulars  in  which  Moses  thought  necessary  to  indulge,  would 
do  honor  to  the  sagacity  of  a  modern  physician.*  To  this  we 
may  safely  add,  that  sanitary  laws  as  applicable  to  our  state  of 
society  as  those  of  Moses  were  to  the  Israelites  of  those  days, 
would  do  honor  to  the  sagacity  of  the  legislative  bodies  of  the 
most  enlightened  nations  of  our  age. 

V.  THE  FAMILY. 

The  families  into  which  each  fatherhouse  was  divided,  was 
not  a  family  proper,  consisting  of  parents  and  children;  it 
was  a  group  of  families  of  the  same  stock.  We  are  to  consider 
under  this  head  the  family  proper.  A  commonwealth  consists 
of  families.  It  must,  therefore,  be  the  especial  care  of  the 
government  on  one  side  to  properly  connect  the  interests  of 
each  family  with  the  commonwealth,  and  on  the  other  side  to 
protect  it  against  undue  interference ;  the  former  was  effected 
by  the  share  which  every  individual  should  have  on  the  govern- 
ment of  the  nation,  and  by  alloting  an  inalienable  parcel  of 
land  to  every  male  person  above  the  age  of  twenty ;  and  the 
latter  was  accomplished  by  strict  laws  against  adultery,  which 
was  punished  with  death,  in  case  of  seducing  a  wife  or  the 
bride  of  another  man,  which  was  inflicted  on  both  parties ;  with 
the  only  exception  in  regard  to  the  woman  in  case  of  rape. 

The  law  has  the  avowed  aim  to  secure  prosperity  and  hap- 
piness to  the  nation ;  the  prosperity  and  happiness  of  the  family 
depends,  in  a  great  measure,  on  the  mistress  of  the  house. 
This  was  much  more  the  case  in  the  days  of  Moses  than  in  our 
day;  for  Diodorus  informs  us,  that  the  woman  was  so  highly 
estimated  among  the  ancient  Egyptians,  that  the  husband  owed 
to  his  wife  obedience  in  all  domestic  affairs.  This  is  partly 
confirmed  by  Josephus.t  The  patriarchs  too  not  only  honored 
l)ut  in  many  cases  obeyed  their  wives ;    Abraham  abandoned 

*  Diction,  des  sciences  med.,  art.  Lepreux,  by  Jordan, 
f  Diodorus,  liv.  i,  4  27;  Antiq.  i,  viii,  $  1. 


PERIOD    I.  143 

Hagar  and  Ishmael  by  the  will  of  his  wife;  and  the  submissive- 
ness  of  Jacob  to  his  wives  is  too  notorious  to  need  remarks. 
The  fact  that  the  bride  was  bought,  and  not  seldom  for  a  very 
high  price,  as  the  service  of  Jacob  rendered  to  Laban  for 
Rachel  and  Leah;  the  gifts  which  Eliezer  gave  to  the  mother 
and  the  brother  of  Rebecca;  the  promise  of  a  large  dowry 
made  by  Hamor  to  Jacob  for  his  daughter  Dinah,  clearly  prove, 
— is  a  sufficient  evidence  that  the  woman  was  highly  estimated 
among  the  Hebrews,  and,  consequently,  the  happiness  and 
prosperity  of  the  family  depended  almost  entirely  on  the  mis- 
tress of  the  house.  It  was,  therefore,  not  necessary  for  Moses 
to  make  laws  directing  the  husband  to  honor  his  wife ;  for  cus- 
tom is  the  most  binding  law.  He  had  once  tor  all  characterized 
woman  as  the  supplement  of  human  nature,  "  In  the  image  of 
Elohim  he  created  them,  male  and  female  he  created  them." 

The  power  of  woman  is  vested  in  her  affections.  If  they 
are  sound  and  unadulterated,  she  is  in  possession  of  the  means 
to  secure  to  herself  the  affections  of  her  husband,  and  to  watch 
over  the  destinies  of  the  house.  If  those  affections  should  be 
maintained  in  their  purity  as  they  are  placed  in  the  heart  by 
the  benign  Creator,  the  law  must  care  that  the  woman  be  ena- 
bled to  maintain  herself  upon  the  summit  of  self  respect,  and 
that  female  chastity  be  religiously  regarded.  Moses,  who  based 
his  laws  upon  the  self-respect  of  the  citizens,  has  certainly 
done  the  same  for  the  female  portion  of  society;  and  we  do 
not  find,  indeed,  that  he  any  where  made  a  distinction  in  the 
law  in  regard  to  sexes,  but  in  some  particular  cases,  which 
we  shall  notice  hereafter.  As  regards  the  protection  of  female 
chastity,  it  must  yet  be  remarked,  that  the  symbol  of  Hermes 
was  not  worn  by  the  men  but  by  the  women  of  Egypt,  and  the 
priests  of  Baal  Peor  were  the  daughters  of  Midian ;  wherefore 
Moses  had  to  make  his  laws  in  regard  to  the  protection  of 
female  chastity  more  severe  for  the  female,  than  for  the  male 
portion  of  society.  So  he  did;  if  one  took  in  marriage  a  vir- 
gin, and  after  marriage  it  was  found  that  she  had  deceived 
her  betrothed,  not  having  been  a  virgin,  the  law  ordered  the 
penalty  of  death  to  the  woman:  but  in   case  of  seduction,   the 


144  APPENDIX    TO 

man  was  only  bound  by  the  law  to  take  her  in  marriage,  or  if 
she  was  refused  to  him,  to  pay  the  father  any  amount  not 
exceeding  fifty  shckils,  which,  however,  was  a  heavy  fine ;  in 
which  regard  no  distinctions  were  made,  whether  the  man  was 
married  or  not. 

Moses  prohibited  not  the  old  practice  of  the  orient,  which 
sanctioned  polygamy.  It  appears  to  us  that  he  could  not  pro- 
hibit it  without  giving  cause  to  a  large  number  of  vices,  and 
without  endangering  female  chastity;  but  the  subject  is  too 
delicate  to  go  into  any  farther  explanations  on  it.  It  may 
suffice  to  remark,  that  Moses  took  much  pains  to  maintain  the 
nation  in  its  unimpaired  strength,  and  only  sound  and  strong- 
mothers  can  give  birth  to  sound  and  strong  children.  He  set 
limits  to  that  practice  which  are  almost  insurmountable  obsta- 
cles ;  he  gave  to  the  woman  her  full  liberty,  none  in  the  world 
could  dispose  of  her  person  whenever  she  was  of  age,  which 
she  surely  was  after  the  age  of  twelve,  and  if  disposed  of 
before  that  age,  she  could  annul  the  contract  when  being  of 
age;  she  was  so  situated  in  society,  that  she  never  had  any 
cause  of  losing  her  self-respect;  to  which  must  be  reckoned 
the  general  custom  of  buying  the  wife,  and  the  Mosaic  laws  in 
regard  to  maintaining  the  equilibrium  of  material  wealth,  and 
it  will  be  admitted  that  it  was  not  easy  to  have  more  than  one 
wife.  , 

Next  it  must  be  considered,  that  the  statistics  of  Asia  show, 
that  the  birth  of  females  by  far  excels  the  birth  of  male  child- 
ren. It  is  evident  from  history,  that  polygamy  was  not  much 
practiced  among  the  people,  although  the  kings  were  extrava- 
gant in  this  and  other  respects. 

The  Mosaic  law  disinherited  the  daughters  from  the  real 
estate  of  their  fathers  as  long  as  there  was  a  male  issue  of  the 
same  degree  of  kindred.  The  causes  have  been  stated  before ; 
but  the  principal  cause  is,  that  the  daughters  stood  not  in  need 
of  any  property,  because  they  were  given  a  certain  dowry  by 
their  husbands.  If  a  man  died,  leaving  his  property  to  his 
sons,  they  were  bound  by  the  law  to  take  care  of  the  widow 
or  widows  of  the  deceased,  or  to  pay  them  their  dowry  if  such 


PERIOD   I.  145 

a  widow  was  not  the  mother  of  the  heirs.  If  she  was  the 
mother,  she  remained  in  her  marital  rights  as  the  law  pre- 
scribed.* 

If  a  man  died,  not  leaving  an  issue  of  the  body,  the  heir  of 
his  property  was  bound  by  the  force  of  custom  to  take  in  mar- 
riage the  widow  of  the  deceased;  and  the  first  son  born  in 
that  wedlock  was  the  heir  of  the  property  of  the  deceased;! 
but  this  is  sure,  that  none  could  force  her  to  marry  the  heir  of 
the  deceased.  If  that  heir  refused  before  a  court  of  law  to 
marry  her,  he  was  deemed  a  dishonorable  man,  which  was 
publicly  signified  to  him  by  spitting  out  before  him  and  taking 
the  sandal  from  his  foot,  calling  his  house  the  house  of  the 
barefooted.  The  widow  then  received  her  dowry,  and  had  no 
farther  claim  on  the  property  of  her  deceased  husband.  Moses 
sanctioned  also  the  custom  of  divorce,  binding  it  on  this  con- 
dition, "  If  he  find  on  her  a  scandalous  thing."  This  law  is 
not  mentioned  there  (Deutr.  xxiv,  1-3)  on  account  of  itself, 
because  it  was  established  custom.  It  is  mentioned  there  on 
account  of  the  second  law  embodied  in  that  passage. 

"  And  if  she  is  departed  out  of  his  house,  and  she  go  and 
be  another  man's  wife; 

"  And  if  the  latter  husband  hate  her,  and  write  her  a  bill 
of  divorcement,  and  giveth  it  in  her  hand,  and  sendeth  her  out 
of  his  house;  or  if  the  latter  husband  die,  which  took  her  to  be 
his  wife ; 

"  Her  former  husband  which  sent  her  away,  may  not  take 
her  again  to  be  his  wife,  after  that  she  is  defiled;  for  that  is 
abomination  before  the  Lord;  and  thou  shalt  not  cause  the  land 
to  sin,  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee  for  an  inheritance. 

This  latter  law  was  made  to  prevent  the  disgraceful  practice 
of  the  Egyptians  of  changing  wives,  as  the  conclusion  of  the 
passage  clearly  proves. 

The  question  was  raised,  why  Moses  did  not  grant  the  same 
privilege  to  the  wife  as  to  the  husband?     Here  we  must  again 

*  Exod.  xx,  12;  Levit.  xix.  3;  Deutr.  v,  16. 

t  Compare  Deutr.  xxv,  5-10  to  Genesis  xxxviii,  6-26  and  Ruth  iv. 
10 


146  APPENDIX    TO 

refer  to  the  general  standing  of  woman  in  the  Mosaic  age.  The 
passage  in  Genesis,  "Wherefore  a  man  leaves  his  father  and  his 
mother  and  cleaves  to  his  wife,"  tolls  us  sufficiently  that  a  case 
of  divorce  belonged  to  the  anomalies  of  the  law.  Indeed  this 
maxim  was  afterwards  current  among  the  people,  "  Who  is 
divorced  of  his  lirst  wife  has  made  the  same  experience  as  if 
the  temple  had  been  destroyed  in  his  days."  It  appears,  as 
we  have  remarked  before,  that  Moses  in  his  age  could  rely 
-more  safely  upon  the  fidelity  and  affections  of  the  husbands 
than  of  the  wives ;  it  was  easier  for  a  woman  to  get  a  husband 
than  for  a  man  to  get  a  wife,  therefore  Moses  could  not  grant 
the  privilege  of  divorce  to  the  wife  without  giving  rise  to  the 
most  intolerable  confusion  in  the  domestic  life.  Besides  this  it 
must  be  remarked,  while  the  law  obliged  the  husband,  "  Her 
food,  her  raiment,  and  her  duty  of  marriage  shall  he  not 
diminish,"  the  wife  was  at  liberty  to  divorce  herself  de  facto 
of  her  husband. 

Next  must  be  considered  the  following  passage  on  vows 
(Numb,  xxx,  6-15),  which  has  been  brought  up  against  Moses, 
as  if  he  would  deprive  woman  of  her  liberty : 

"And  if  she  had  at  all  an  husband  when  she  vowed,  or 
uttered  aught  out  of  her  lips,  wherewith  she  bound  her  person, 

"  And  her  husband  heard  it,  and  held  his  peace  at  her  in 
the  day  that  he  heard  it:  then  her  vows  shall  stand,  and  her 
bonds  wherewith  she  bound  her  person  shall  stand. 

"  But  if  her  husband  disallowed  her  on  the  day  that  he 
heard  it,  then  he  shall  make  her  vow  which  she  vowed,  and 
that  which  she  uttered  with  her  lips,  wherewith  she  bound  her 
person  of  none  effect;  and  the  Lord  shall  forgive  her. 

"  But  every  vow  of  a  widow,  and  of  her  that  is  divorced, 
wherewith  they  have  bound  their  persons,  shall  stand  against 
her. 

"And  if  she  vowed  in  her  husband's  house,  or  bound  her 
person  by  a  bond  with  an  oath ; 

"And  her  husband  heard  it,  and  held  his  peace  at  her, 
and  disallowed  her  not;  then  all  her  vows  shall  stand,  and 
every  bond  wherewith  she  bound  her  person  shall  stand. 


PERIOD   I.  147 

"  But  if  her  husband  hath  utterly  made  tliem  void  on  the 
day  he  heard  them  ;  then  whatsoever  proceeded  out  of  her  lips 
concerning  her  vows,  or  concerning  the  bond  of  her  person, 
shall  not  stand:  her  husband  hath  made  them  void;  and  the 
Lord  shall  forgive  her. 

"  Every  vow  and  every  binding  oath  to  afflict  the  person, 
her  husband  may  establish  it,  or  her  husband  may  make  it 
void. 

"  But  if  her  husband  altogether  hold  his  peace  at  her  from 
day  to  day:  then  he  establisheth  all  her  vows,  or  all  her  bonds, 
which  are  upon  her:  he  confirmeth  them,  because  he  held  his 
peace  at  her  in  the  day  that  he  heard  them. 

"But  if  he  shall  any  ways  make  them  void  after  that  she 
hath  heard  them  ;  then  he  shall  bear  her  iniquity. 

The  law  never  could  give  sanction  to  a  custom  by  which  a 
wife  disposed  of  her  person  without  the  consent  of  her  husband, 
be  this  a  vow  of  fasting  for  a  certain  time,  or  devoting  herself 
to  the  service  of  the  Lord  and  neglecting  thereby  her  domestic 
duties;  nor  could  it  give  its  sanction  to  the  act  of  a  wife  dis- 
posing of  property  without  the  cons.nt  of  her  husband.  The 
husband  was  bound  by  the  law  to  do  his  duty  to  his  family, 
nor  could  he  dispose  of  the  dowry  of  his  wife,  which  he  was 
bound  to  secure  to  her,  consequently  this  law  was  not  neces- 
sary in  regard  to  the  husband.  Still,  it  confers  the  privilege 
upon  the  wife,  if  her  husband  wras  silent  at  the  time  when  the 
vow  or  oath  was  pronounced,  he  had  no  right  afterwards  to  annul 
it.  Husband  and  wife  had  equal  claims  upon  their  children.* 
They  were  the  absolute  masters  of  their  children,  and  could 
even  sell  them  as  long  as  they  were  not  of  age.  But  in  this 
respect  children  were  considered  of  age  when  twelve  or  thir- 
teen years  old,  when  such  a  contract  was  annulled  per  se 
(Exod.  xxi,  7).  The  court  of  justice  was  obliged  to  assist 
them,  if  they  could  not  succeed  to  make  their  children  obedi- 
ent (ibid  xxi,  15;  Deutr.  xxi,  18-21).  They  were  bound  in 
duty  to  instruct  their  children  in  the  law  {Deutr.  vi,  7);  and 

*  Exod.  xx,  12 -  Levit.  xix,  3;  Exod.  xxi,  15. 


148  APPENDIX    TO 

were  responsible  to  society  for  their  actions  (Dentr.  xxiv,  16). 
These  laws  touching  the  family  are  not  new,  they  are  based 
upon  patriarchal  customs  and  Egyptian  laws.  Still  that  ori- 
ental custom,  which  gives  the  father  the  right  even  to  kill 
his  son,  Moses  had  utterly  abolished,  commanding  the  parents 
to  bring  their  disobedient  son  before  a  court  of  law;  but 
then  father  and  mother  had  to  enter  complaint  against 
their  son  to  this  effect:  '*  This,  our  son,  is  stubborn  and  rebel- 
lious, he  will  not  hearken  to  our  voice;  he  is  a  glutton  and  a 
drunkard."  If  the  judges  condemned  him  to  death,  the  parents, 
as  the  only  witnesses,  must  first  lay  hand  on  him.  It  is  there- 
fore not  likely,  that  ever  such  a  case  occurred,  as  indeed  also 
the  ancient  rabbins  supposed. 

It  may  be  asserted,  that  the  family  affairs  were  regulated 
wisely  and  minutely,  the  principle  of  which  was  set  down  in 
the  fundamental  laws,  the  ten  commandments.  The  principle 
of  liberty  and  equality  is  visible  in  every  law,  which  is  every 
where  connected  with  a  due  regard  to  the  moral  sentiments  of 
man,  the  circumstances  and  customs  as  Moses  found  them 
among  his  constituents.  On  the  whole,  it  may  be  asserted, 
that  none  of  the  ancient  legislators  have  treated  so  fully  on 
this  subject  as  Moses  has,  and  our  present  laws  of  almost  all 
the  civilized  nations  are  materially  the  same,  having  undergone 
but  slight  modifications. 

VI.  SERVANTS. 

The  Mosaic  dispensation  notices  three  kinds  of  servants, 
both  male  and  female.  1.  The  servant  hired  by  the  day,  in 
regard  to  whom  the  law  states,  "  Thou  shalt  not  withhold 
the  wages  of  a  hired  man  who  is  poor  and  needy  (whether  he 
be)  of  thy  brethren  or  of  thy  stranger  which  are  in  thy  land, 
in  thy  gates.  On  the  same  day  thou  shalt  give  him  his  hire, 
and  thou  shalt  not  let  set  the  sun  upon  it;  for  he  is  poor  and 
his  soul  longeth  for  it ;  that  he  may  not  cry  against  thee  unto 
the  Lord,  and  it  be  sin  unto  thee  "  (Deutr.  xxiv,  14,  15).  From 
this  passage,  we  learn  directly,  that  payment  for  work  done 


PERIOD    I.  149 

must  be  made  at  the  day  when  done;  and  we  learn,  indirectly, 
that  a  day's  work  was  to  end  before  sun-set. 

The  second  class  of  servants  is  the  Hebrew  who  either  sold 
himself,  or  was  sold  for  punishment  by  a  legal  court,  whose 
time  of  service  extended  to  the  year  of  release,  and  who  could 
not  serve  his  master  longer  than  to  the  jubilee  year.  In  regard 
to  this  class  of  servants,  the  law  ordains  not  to  compel  him 
to  the  labor  of  a  bond  man,  to  consider  him  as  a  hired  ser- 
vant, as  a  sojourner,  and  that  he  and  his  family  must  be  given 
free  at  the  year  of  release.  And  if  he  sold  himself  to  a 
foreigner,  or  to  one  of  the  aborigines,  he  must  be  treated  in 
the  same  manner;  besides  which,  he  or  his  relatives  were  at 
any  time  entitled  to  procure  his  liberty  by  refunding  to  his 
master  an  aggregate  sum  of  money  in  ratio  to  the  years  up  to 
the  year  of  release  and  to  the  price  paid  for  him;  "  For  unto 
me  are  the  children  of  Israel  servants,  my  servants  are  they 
whom  I  have  brought  out  from  the  land  of  Egypt,  I  am  the 
Lord  your  God"  (Levit.  xxvi,  39-55).  "If  thy  brother  the 
Hebrew,  or  a  Hebrew  woman,  be  sold  unto  thee,  he  shall  serve 
thee  six  years ;  and  in  the  seventh  year  thou  shalt  let  him  go 
free  from  thee.  And  when  thou  lettest  him  go  out  free  from 
thee,  thou  shalt  not  let  him  go  away  empty.  Thou  shalt  fur- 
nish him  liberally  out  of  thy  Hock,  and  out  of  thy  threshing- 
floor,  and  out  of  thy  wine-press ;  wherewith  the  Lord  thy  God 
hath  blessed  thee,  that  shalt  thou  give  unto  him.  And  thou 
shalt  remember  that  thou  wast  a  bondman  in  the  land  of 
Egypt,  therefore  I  command  thee  this  thing  to-day'"  (Deutr.  xv, 
12-18).  The  man  servant  and  the  maid  servant  are  remem- 
bered to  equal  rights  with  their  masters,  not  only  in  the 
command  of  the  sabbath  day  (Deutr.  v,  14,  15),  and  national 
festivals  {Deutr.  xv,  11,  14),  but  also  at  the  family  feasts 
(Deutr.  xii,  12-18). 

The  third  class  of  servants  are  bondmen  and  bondwomen, 
improperly  called  slaves,  who  could  be  bought  of  foreign 
countries,  of  the  strangers  and  of  the  aborigines  of  Canaan, 
and  which  were  inherited  as  property  (Levit.  xxv,  44-40). 
Kidnapping  was  considered  a  capital  crime   (Exod.  xxi,    16; 


150 


APPENDIX    TO 


Deutr.  xxiv,  7),  and  was  to  be  punished  by  death.  The  fugi- 
tive slave  coming  from  another  country  was  free  (Deutr.  xxiii, 
16,  17).  The  law  in  regard  to  this  class  of  servants  maintains, 
that  if  one  strike  his  servant  with  a  stick  so  that  lie  instantly 
die,  vengeance  shall  be  taken;  to  which  the  expounders  of  the 
law  added,  that  he  was  killed  by  the  sword.  But  if  he  goes 
about  for  a  day  or  two,  and  then  he  die,  no  vengeance  shall  be 
taken.  If  he  strikes  out  a  tooth  or  the  eye  of  his  servant, 
or  as  the  expounders  of  the  law  understood  it,  he  injures  one 
of  the  extremities  of  the  body,  the  servant  is  free  on  account 
of  this  injury  (Exod.  xxi,  20,  21,  26,  27).  Moses  could  not 
abolish  slavery,  which  was  then  common  to  all  nations ;  he  was 
bound  to  preserve  this  institution  on  account  of  the  prisoners 
of  war,  whose  lives  were  saved  by  it.  He  gave  laws  to  secure 
to  the  bondman  a  humane  treatment.  This  third  class  of 
servants  was  also  included  in  the  above  mentioned  enjoyments 
of  sabbaths,  general  and  family  festivals,  when  they  should 
have  rest  and  rejoice  together  with  their  masters. 

VII.  THE  POOR,  WIDOWS,  ORPHANS  AND 
STRANGERS. 

"  If  there  be  among  thee  a  needy  man  of  one  of  thy  brethren 
within  any  of  thy  gates,  in  the  land  which  the  Lord  thy  God 
giveth  thee;  thou  shalt  not  harden  thy  heart,  nor  shut  thy 
hand  from  thy  needy  brother.  But  thou  shalt  open  wide  thy 
hand  unto  him,  and  shalt  surely  lend  hjm  sufficient  for  his 
need,  which  his  want  requireth  "  (Deutr.  xv,  7,  8).  In  this 
law  also  the  stranger  was  included  (Levit.  xxv,  35).  No 
interest  whatever  should  be  taken  from  the  sum  of  money 
or  quantity  of  food  thus  lent  to  the  poor  (ibid).  Besides  that, 
every  body  was  permitted  by  law  to  eat  as  much  of  the  fruits 
belonging  to  his  neighbor,  until  his  hunger  was  satisfied 
(Deutr.  xxiii,  25,  26);  the  strangers,  widows  and  orphans 
were  remembered  at  every  festival  and  every  family  sacrifice; 
and  all  fruits  of  the  years  of  release  and  jubilee  were  free  to 
every  man/     There  was  also  given  to  the  poor  the  second  tithe 

*  Leviticus  xxv,  1-7:  Deuteronomy  xv. 


PERIOD   I.  151 

of  every  second  year  (Dentr.  xii.  28,  20),  of  all  the  fruits  of 
the  land,  of  which  we  shall   treat  hereafter.     "And  when  ye 
reap   the   harvest  of  your  land,  thou  shalt  not  wholly  reap  the 
corners   of  thy  fields,   neither  shalt  thou  gather  the  gleanings 
of  thy  harvest.     And  thou  shalt   not  glean  thy  vineyard,  and 
what  droppeth  in  thy  vineyard  shalt  thou  not  gather;  for  the 
poor  and   stranger  shalt   thou  leave   them  (Levit.  xix,  9,  10). 
To  this  is  added  (Deutr.  xxiv),  "  If  a  sheaf  be  forgotten  in  the 
field,  thou  shalt  not  go  back  to  fetch  it;  for  the  stranger,  for 
the  orphan,  and  for  the  widow  shall  it  be.*'     Resides  the  laws 
of  presents   due   to  the  poor,  the  stranger,  widow  and  orphan, 
there  are  yet  these  laws  referring  to  them.    If  one  has  a  pledge 
of  a  poor   man   for  money  loaned,  he   shall  not  keep  it  over 
night;  but  return  it  to   him,  that  he  may  lay  under  his  own 
cover — if  the  pledge  was  such — and  bless  him   (Deutr.  xxiv, 
10-13);  which  undoubtedly  means,  if  the  pledge  was  his  only 
bed  or  cover.     Then  it  says  (ibid  17),  "Thou  shalt  not  per- 
vert  the  judgment  of  the  stranger  or  of  the  fatherless,  and 
thou  shalt  not  take  in  pledge  the  raiment  of  a  widow."     The 
same  laws   also   occur  in  Exodus  xxii,  20-26;  xxiii,  3,  6,  9; 
Levit.  xix,  33,  34.     It  is  therefore  evident,  that  Moses  directly 
counteracted  the  Egyptian  policy  of  intolerance.     He  not  only 
secured  to   the   stranger  the  full  protection  of  the  law,  but  he 
included  him  everywhere  in  the  laws  of  charity,  so  that  none 
suffer  in  the  land  of  Israel.    This  kind  of  treating  the  stranger 
was  thoroughly  patriarchal.    Remarkable  in  this  law  of  charity 
is   this,   that   the  poor  are  not  given  the  prepared  victuals  but 
at  festive  occasions:  nor  is   it  commanded  to    store  them  in 
poor  houses.     The  Law  says,  he  should  be  lent  money  without 
paying  interest,  that  he  may  help  himself  in   the   one  or  the 
other  business.     He   should  be  given  fruits,  grains,  &c.,  but 
he  must  gather  and  then  prepare  them  for  food;  because  there 
should  be  no  idlers,  no  lazy  vagrants  in  Israel;  every  one  should 
toil  and  labor  for  his  bread.     We  have  in  vain  investigated  the 
ancient  laws  of  the  most  enlightened  nations,  and  we  have  not 
found  anything  in  them  to  compare  in  prudence  and  humanity 
with  the  laws  of  Moses,  but  as  regards  the  laws  of  charity  and 


152  APPENDIX    TO 

tolerance  especially,  the  most  enlightened  modern  nations  have 
not  yet  reached  the  eminence  of  the  Mosaic  law.  There  were 
not,  and  there  are  no  laws  of  charity  among  the  nations,  which 
degrades  the  poor  and  needy  to  beggars,  and  makes  them  to 
be  the  slaves  of  the  whims  of  the  rich;  while  laics  of  charity 
maintain  the  poor  and  needy  at  a  certain  height  of  self-esteem, 
encourage  him  to  come  out  of  his  unhappy  condition,  and  pre- 
vent many  a  horrid  crime  now  defiling  civilized  society. 

VIII.  COMMERCE. 

A  country  with  a  fertile  soil,  industrious  inhabitants,  who  are 
accustomed  to  temperate  living,  productive  in  tropical  fruits, 
grains,  olives  and  wine,  and  having  an  affluence  of  honey,  and 
most  likely  also  of  butter,  wool,  leather  and  other  products, 
being  located  as  Palestine  is,  at  the  Mediterranean  sea,  acces- 
sible to  the  Phoenician  and  Egyptian  merchants,  must  have 
some  laws  to  regulate  its  inland  and  foreign  commerce.  Moses 
did  not  intend  that  the  Israelites  should  embark  in  foreign 
trade.  He  ceded  this  advantage  to  the  foreigner  (nachri);  and 
his  laws  regarding  the  stranger  (guer)  were  of  such  a  nature, 
that  every  foreigner,  if  his  nation  was  in  peace  with  Israel, 
could  come  to  Palestine,  and  either  settle  there  or  transact 
business  there.  Moses  predicted,  that  if  they  would  observe 
the  laws  commanded  unto  them,  they  would  have  super- 
abundance of  everything,  so  that  they  would  lend  or  sell  their 
products  to  many  nations,  and  they  would  borrow  or  buy  of 
none  {Deutr.  xxviii,  12).  But  if  there  shall  exist  a  commerce 
there  must  be  a  credit,  which  Moses  permitted  in  regard  to 
foreigners,  contrary  to  the  Egyptian  laws,  which  prohibited 
to  lend  money  into  foreign  countries.  Still,  if  money  was 
loaned  into  foreign  countries,  the  state  loses  it  during  that 
time.  Therefore  Moses  permitted  them  to  take  interest  of 
money  loaned  into  foreign  countries,  which  was  not  only  an 
indemnation  for  the  loss  of  a  capital  for  a  certain  time,  but 
also  an  inducement  to  the  individual  to  give  credit,  and  an 
encouragement  to  foreign  trade  {Deutr.  xxiii,  21);  wherefore 
the    legislator,    after  having  mentioned    this    law,   continues, 


PERIOD     I.  153 

**  That  the  Lord  thy  God  may  bless  thee  in  all  the  acquisitions 
of  thy  hands,  in  the  land  which  thou  gocst  to  possess  it." 

"  The  precepts  regarding  commerce,"  says  I.  Salvador, 
"were  simple,  '  Keep  faithfully  your  promise;  do  not  cunningly 
depress  the  price  of  goods;  take  nothing  in  an  unjust  way  by 
cunningness  or  force;  lay  no  impediment  into  the  way  of  the 
stranger  who  comes  to  settle  with  thee ;  assist  him  if  he  is  in 
peril  or  danger,  and  do  no  injustice  to  the  stranger,  from 
whatever  place  he  may  come'  "  (torn,  i,  b.  iii,  c.  6;  Exod.  xxiii, 
7;  Levit.  xix,  2;  JSumb.  xxx,  3;  Prov.  xx,  14;  Levit.  vi,  2,  4; 
Exod.  xxii,  21;  xxiii,  9;  Levit.  xxv,  47).  The  tribe  of 
Zebulon,  probably  engaged  in  commerce  while  in  Egypt,  was 
to  occupy  the  sea  ports;*  and  Issaehar  was  to  do  the  inland 
trade.  The  inland  commerce  among  Israelites  and  resident 
strangers,  was  remarkably  impeded  by  several  laws,  which 
must  lead  us  to  the  idea,  that  Moses  wished  the  Israelite  not 
to  be  a  merchant.  The  credit  must  have  been  very  limited,  for 
it  was  prohibited  to  take  any  sort  of  interest.!  If  the  creditor 
was  in  danger  of  losing  his  money,  he  could  demand  a  pledge 
of  the  debtor;  but  he  was  not  permitted  to  enter  his  house, 
who  had  to  bring  him  out  the  pledge  (Deutr.  xxiv,  10,  11),  so 
that  the  debtor  had  a  chance  of  delivering  up  to  the  creditor, 
what  he  could  spare  the  best.  Nor  was  he  permitted  to  take  as 
a  pledge  what  the  debtor  needed  in  order  to  earn  a  living  (ibid 
(>).  Nor  did  Moses  say  that  the  debtor's  house  or  real  estate 
can  be  sold,  which,  if  even  sold,  had  to  be  restored  at  the 
jubilee  year;  and  if  the  debtor  did  not  make  payment  before 
the  year  of  release,  that  year  annulled  the  debt  (Deutr.  xv,  2, 
3).  The  law  in  regard  to  weight  and  measure,  says,  "Ye 
shall  do  no  unrighteousness  in  judgment,  in  mete  yard,  in 
weight,  or  in  measure.  Just  balance,  just  weights,  a  just 
ephah,  and  a  just  hin  shall  you  have.?'|  In  the  latter  passage 
occurs  the  addition,  "  For  an  abomination  of  the  Lord  thy 
God  is  every  one  that  doth  such  things,  every  one  that  acteth 

*  Genesis  xlix,  13;  Deuteronomy  xxxiii,  IS,  19. 

t  Deuteronomy  xxiii,  20. 

t  Leviticus  xix,  35,  36;  Deuteronomy  xxv,  13-16. 


154  APPENDIX    TO 

unrighteously."     It  is  extremely  easy  to  adduce   reasons   for 
these  laws  of  commerce.     It  strikes  us  there  are  but  four. 

1.  Nothing  is  more  dangerous  to  the  mental  development  of 
a  nation  than  the  love  of  gain;  and  nothing  produces  more 
love  of  gain  than  an  extensive  commerce.  If  the  Israelites 
with  the  lively  energies  and  passions,  which  a  tropical  climate 
produces,  had  engaged  in  an  extensive  commerce,  the  whole 
mind  of  the  nation  would  have  been  engulfed  in  the  yawning 
abyss  of  avarice  and  love  of  gain,  which  would  have  crushed 
the  whole  destiny  of  the  nation. 

2.  An  extensive  commerce  must  have  had  the  effect  of 
making  some  citizens  very  opulent ;  the  accumulation  of  wealth 
is  the  direct  opposite  of  the  equality  of  possession  intended  by 
the  Mosaic  law,  and  is  so  dangerous  to  the  liberties  of  the 
people,  that  more  than  one  nation  have  lost  their  liberty,  and 
also  their  political  existence  by  the  opulence  of  a  few  citizens. 

3.  It  would  have  been  dangerous  to  the  Israelites  had  they 
come  much  in  contact  with  foreign  nations,  their  idolatry  and 
moral  debasement,  before  they  were  totally  pervaded  by  their 
own  institutions.  History  proves  that  the  apprehensions  of 
Moses  were  just. 

4.  The  engagement  in  an  extensive  commerce,  must  have 
produced,  inevitably,  war  with  the  maritime  nations,  as  it  did 
afterwards  when  they  were  really  engaged  in  commercial 
pursuits,  involving  them  in  war  with  Syria,  Assyria,  Egypt  and 
Babylonia,  which  Moses  had  many  reasons  not  to  wish;  and  so 
he  ceded  the  foreign  trade  to  foreign  merchants. 

IX.  THE  SECURITY  OF  PERSON. 

"Thou  shalt  not  kill,-'  is  one  of  the  fundamental  laws  of 
the  Mosaic  dispensation,  and  consequently,  it  must  have  been 
prohibited  to  strike  a  person  (Exodus  xxi,  18,  19),  to  injure 
him  on  his  limbs  (ibid  23,  24),  or  to  cause  in  any  way  that  one 
be  injured  (ibid  33;  Deutr.  xix,  18,  19;  xxii,  8),  "  Thou  shalt  not 
lay  a  stumbling-block  before  the  blind;  "  nor  stand  by  inactively 
if  injury  is  done  to  a  fellow-man  (Levit.  xix,   17),  nor  even 


PERIOD    I.  155 

desire  in  the  heart,  that  one  he  injured,  although  he  he  one's 
enemy  (Levit.  xix,  17,  18),  "  Thou  shalt  not  curse  the  deaf." 
The  Mosaic  law  was  not  intended  to  command  or  prohibit  an 
outward  action  merely,  it  intended  to  operate  upon  the  source 
of  all  good  and  evil  actions,  upon  the  rational  will,  wherefore 
the  decalogue  concludes  with  the  commandment,  "  Thou  shalt 
not  covet. " 

X.  THE  SECURITY  OF  PROPERTY. 

"Thou  shalt  not  steal  "  is  another  fundamental  law,  nor 
rob,  nor  withhold  any  thing  belonging  to  the  neighbor  (Lev. 
xix,  13).  nor  deny  another's  property  in  our  hands  (ibidxi); 
nor  cause  any  damage  to  the  property  of  the  neighbor  (Exod. 
xxi,  33-36;  xxii,  4,  5).  nor  stand  by  inactively  when  the 
property  of  another  is  damaged.  "  If  thou  meet  thy  enemy's  ox 
or  his  ass  going  astray,  thou  shalt  surely  bring  it  back  to  him 
again.  If  thou  see  the  ass  of  him  that  hateth  thee  lying 
under  his  burden,  thou  shalt  abstain  from  forsaking  him,  but 
thou  shalt  surely  unload  him"  (Exod.  xxiii,  4-5;  Deutr.  xxii, 
1-4);  nor  should  any  one  desire  to  possess  the  property  of 
another  man  (Exod.  xx,  17;  Deutr.  v,  18).  Only  such  pro- 
perty which  had  no  legal  owner,  as  game  (Lev.  xvii,  13)  or 
wild  fowl  (Deutr.  xxii,  6,  7),  and  the  like,  may  be  taken  by 
the  first  finder.  As  regards  real  estate,  the  law  ordains :  "  Thou 
shall  not  remove  the  land  mark  of  thy  neighbor,  which  the 
first  ones  will  set  in  thy  inheritance,  which  thou  shalt  inherit 
in  the  land  that  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee  to  possess  it" 
(Deutr.  xix,  14). 

XI.  THE  SECURITY  OF  HONOR. 

If  the  law  would  have  been  silent  on  this  point,  it  would  be 
understood,  es  ipso,  that  a  code  of  laws  which  is  founded  upon 
the  moral  self-esteem  of  the  individuals  as  members  of  society, 
must  prohibit  slander;  still  the  law  provided  for  this  case  too. 
"  Thou  shalt  not  go  about  as  a  talebearer  among  thy  nation," 
which  signifies,  that  none  should  debase  the  character  of 
another  by  words.    "  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness  against 


156  APPENDIX   TO  « 

thy  neighbor;  "you  shall  say  no  lies  one  against  another" 
(Lev.  xix,  12).  These  provisions  are  eminently  calculated  to 
guard  the  honor  of  the  citizen.  This  law  is  expressed  in 
unquestionable  terms  in  the  case  of  false  accusation  of  a 
woman  by  her  husband  (Deuir.  xxii,  13-19)  and  in  the 
punishment  of  Miriam  when  speaking  ill  of  her  brother  Moses 
(Xumb,  xii,  1-10).  It  is  unnecessary  to  add,  that  the  law 
made  provisions  for  the  protection  of  female  chastity,  whereas 
it  has  been  remarked  before  what  an  eminent  position  the 
female  sex  held  in  the  ancient  society  of  the  orient;  and  how 
the  law  punished  the  violation  of  matrimonial  ties  or  the  pledge 
of  love;  still  we  may  refer  our  readers  to  Exod.  xx,  14;  xxii, 
15,  16;  Deutr.  v,  17;  xxi,  10-13;  xxii,  5,  28,  29. 

XII.  THE  PENAL  LAW. 

The  above  named  and  all  other  prohibitive  laws  in  the 
Mosaic  dispensation,  although  no  punishment  is  expressly 
stated,  were  to  be  strictly  enforced  by  the  courts.  The  viola- 
tion of  either  of  them  was  punished  by  the  bastinade.  If  one 
had  an  unjust  meteyard,  &c,  or  seeing  the  ass  of  his  enemy 
laying  under  his  burthen,  and  he  did  not  help  him  up,  or  the 
like,  he  was  punished  with  a  bastinade.  The  Mosaic  law 
knows  of  the  following  punishments:  1,  fines  in  money,  in 
default  of  which  the  individual  could  be  hired  out  by  the  court 
to  pay  his  fine;  2,  the  bastinade;  3,  the  political  death,  or 
the  loss  of  citizenship,  sometimes  with  and  sometimes  without 
the  threatening  of  a  future  punishment,  or  an  early  death;  4, 
the  capital  punishment.  The  first  class  of  punishment  was 
applied  to  cases  of  theft  (Exod.  xxi,  37;  xxii,  3);  of  deceitful 
concealing  of  the  property  of  others  (ibid  xxii,  8);  of  seduction 
(ibid  xxii,  15,  16;  Deutr.  xxii,  28,  29);  of  slandering  his  wife 
(ibid  xxii,  19);  of  having  caused  a  damage  to  the  property  of 
another  (Exod.  xxi,  32-36;  xxii,  4,  5);  of  assault  and  battery 
(ibid  xxi,  18,  19-22-25);  and  of  having  been  by  frivolity  the 
cause  of  the  death  of  a  person  (ibid  28-31), 

There  are,  according  to  |the  expounders  of  the  law,  one 
hundred  and   sixty- oi^ht   prohibitions  in  the   Pentateuch,  the 


PERIOD    I.  157 

transgression  of  which  was  punished  by  the  bastinacle*  of 
which  the  greatest  number  belongs  into  the  branch  of  the 
ceremonial  law,  which  was  intended  to  crush  the  practice  of 
idolatry;  and  a  great  number  of  which  could  only  be  trans- 
gressed by  the  priests.  It  is  sufficient  to  our  purpose  to  notice 
those  cases  only  which  belong  to  the  law  proper.  Those  were 
punished  with  the  bastinade  who  did  not  give  to  the  poor  what 
the  law  prescribes;  who  entered  the  house  of  his  debtor,  took 
his  moveable  property  for  a  pledge  and  did  not  return  it;  who 
took  in  such  a  way  the  moveable  property  of  a  widow,  or  who 
took  of  a  man  the  tools  with  which  he  earns  a  living;  who 
strikes  a  man  without  doing  him  a  visible  injury ;  who  slanders 
a  man  by  lies,  or  who  slanders  his  wife  in  order  to  be  divorced 
of  her;  who  curses  a  man  with  the  name  of  God;  the  false 
witness  in  either  of  these  cases;  who  is  guilty  of  perjury,  or 
of  a  breach  of  promise  under  oath,  and  some  other  cases. 
There  are  enumerated  by  the  expounders  of  the  law  (Mishna, 
Kerisuth  i,  1)  thirty  six  transgressions,  which  were  punished 
by  the  loss  of  citizenship  (karath);  sixteen  of  which  are 
prohibited  cases  of  sexual  connections.  The  rest  of  them 
besides  two,  concern  religion,  and  were  intended  against  the 
practice  of  idolatry.  The  neglect  of  the  act  of  circumcision, 
and  of  bringing  the  annual  sacrifice  of  passover  are  of  a  purely 
national  character.  It  appears,  however,  that  this  loss  of 
citizenship  did  not  last  for  a  longer  time  than  the  day  of  atone- 
ment; if  the  transgressor  repented  his  sin,  and  came  to  make 
atonement  for  it.  That  day  appears  to  have  been  intended  in 
political  affairs  as  a  day  of  general  amnesty  (Lev.  xvi,  29-34); 
if  the  grievance  was  not  one  between  man  and  man. 

Capital  punishment  is  ordained  by  the  law  for  willful  murder 
(Exod.  xxi,  12-14),  for  striking,  cursing  or  totally  disobeying 
father  and  mother  (ibid  xxi.  15,  17;  Deutr.  xxi,  15-17);  for 
kidnapping  (Exod.  xxi,  16;  Deutr.  xxiv,  7);  for  bestiality 
(Exod.  xxii,  17;  Levit.  xx,  15,  16),  for  sexual  intercourse 
with  certain  persons  (Levit.  xx,  10-14;  Deutr.  xxii,  20-27); 

*Maimonides.     On  the  Senate  S.  xix,  $  4. 


158  APPENDIX    TO 

and  for  high  treason,  under  which  latter  branch  must  be  under- 
stood the  violation  of  the  sabbath  {Exod.  xxxi,  14,  15),  the 
day  set  apart  to  the  service  of  the  Supreme  Ruler  of  the 
nation;  the  act  of  sacrificing  his  children  to  Maloch  (Levit.  xx, 
1-6);  or  who  serves  Ob  and  Jidoni  (ibid  xx,  27);  who  curses 
the  Deity  (ibid  xxiv,  13-17);  the  false  prophet  (Deutr.  xiii,  2- 
7;  xviii,  20);  who  seduces  others  to  idolatry  (ibid  xiii,  7-12); 
the  inhabitants  of  a  whole  city  who  have  yielded  to  idolatry 
(ibid  12-19);  who  willingly  disobeys  the  orders  of  the  national 
government  (ibid  xvii,  8-13).  There  are  but  three  kinds  of 
capital  punishment,  stoning,  burning  and  hanging.  In  regard 
to  the  latter  mode  of  punishment,  it  is  also  ordained,  that  the 
body  of  the  delinquent  shall  be  buried  before  night  {Deutr. 
xxi,  22-23).  The  law  is  particularly  strict  in  regard  to  the 
murderer.  The  custom  of  the  Egyptians,  Greeks  and  Romans, 
that  the  temples  of  the  gods  were  the  places  of  refuge  for  all 
sorts  of  criminals,  was  abolished  by  Moses  (Exod.  xxi,  14);  so 
did  Moses  abolish  the  custom  of  paying  werigild  for  homicide 
(Numb,  xxxv,  31),  which,  however,  seems  to  teach  indirectly, 
that  a  ransom  may  be  taken  for  a  person  in  other  cases,  where 
the  law  sets  capital  punishment. 

If  a  man  be  found  slain  in  the  field,  the  court  next  to 
the  spot  was  to  take  cognizance  of  the  case,  and  to  signify 
their  knowledge  of  the  case  by  a  sacrifice  called  Eglah 
Arupah.  A  young  heifer  was  killed  by  breaking  her  neck, 
and  the  elders  pronounced  that  they  did  not  know  who 
was  the  criminal,  and  that  it  was  their  duty  to  ascertain 
(Deuteronomy,  xxi,  1-9).  On  the  other  side,  the  law  was  no 
less  strict,  that  no  innocent  person  be  condemned.  "  And 
there  shall  not  be  shed  innocent  blood  in  the  midst  of  thy  land, 
which  the  Lord  thy  God  gives  thee  for  an  inheritance."  No 
man  should  be  condemned  to  any  sort  of  punishment,  other- 
wise than  before  the  regular  court  of  justice  of  his  own  place, 
the  elders  of  his  city  (Deut.  xix,  12);  nor  otherwise  than  by 
the  positive  evidence  of  at  least  two  witnesses,  who  witnessed 
the  action  (Deut.  xix,  15),  who  were  to  be  examined  carefully 
(Deutr.  xiii,  15;  xix,  18).  The  false  witness  was  to  receive 
the   same  punishment  as  his  testimony,    if  true,  would  have 


PERIOD    I.  159 

brought  on  the  accused  (ibid  16-21);  and  the  judges,  who  sit 
in  a  public  place,  exposed  to  the  censure  of  the  people,  were 
charged  again  and  again  to  dispense  justice  in  the  name  of  God. 

The  horrid  custom  among  ancient  nations,  the  next  relative 
of  the  slain  person  taking  revenge  on  the  criminal,  was 
abolished  by  Moses  by  his  six  cities  of  refuge,  to  which  the 
manslayer  could  escape,  and  to  which  the  roads  must  have 
been  in  the  best  order.  If  the  refugee  was  guilty  of  intentional 
murder,  the  elders  of  his  city  brought  him  before  their  court 
and  condemned  him.  If  it  was  found,  that  it  was  an  uninten- 
tional murder  which  he  had  committed,  he  was  to  stay  in 
one  of  those  cities  until  the  high  priest  died  (Exod%  xxi,  13; 
Numb,  xxxv,  9-34;  Deutr.  iv,  41-42;  xix,  1-13).  This 
punishment  for  unintentional  murder  was  every  way  just,  as 
frivolity  is  a  crime,  and  especially  then,  if  it  has  reached  such 
a  degree  as  to  cause  homicide.  His  stay  among  the  Levites 
was  not  merely  calculated  to  protect  him  against  the  avenger, 
but  also  to  cure  him  of  his  levity. 

The  fundamental  idea  of  the  penal  law,  of  which  our 
limits  permit  us  to  give  but  a  brief  sketch,  is  this:  the  law 
is  for  the  protection  and  benefit  of  the  whole  community; 
if  one  violate  it,  he  gives  offence  to  the  whole  community, 
who  for  the  sake  of  its  own  protection  must  give  such  a 
punishment  to  the  offender  as  is  strong  enough  to  occasion 
him  to  fear  its  return.  But  if  one  has  so  deeply  sunk 
into  vice  as  to  commit  willful  murder,  he  is  so  dangerous  to 
the  community  and  most  likely  so  incurable,  that  he  must  be 
removed  from  society.  To  let  the  murderer  emigrate  before  the 
final  sentence  of  the  court  is  given,  as  the  Greeks  did,  is  undoubt- 
edly a  gross  injustice  committed  on  foreign  countries,  to  which 
Moses  could  not  consent.  Many  of  the  cases  which  the  Penta- 
teuch punishes  with  death,  were  undoubtedly  intended  only  for 
the  time  of  their  stay  in  the  wilderness,  when  the  strictest  mar- 
tial law  was  necessary.  At  all  events  they  were  calculated  but 
for  the  infancy  of  the  nation.  Therefore,  as  we  have  remarked 
before,  many  sideways,  as  it  were,  were  left  for  the  expounders 
of  the  law,  who  made  the  best  use  of  them.  Disobedience  to 
the  sreneral  government  was  one  of  the  greatest  crimes  as  long 


160  APPENDIX    TO 

as  the  union  of  the  nation  was  not  strong  enough  to  maintain 
itself  by  less  rigid  means;  as  soon  as  this  was  the  case,  capital 
punishment  for  this  offence  was  abolished.  This  penal  law  is 
by  no  means  as  severe  as  that  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans  was. 
And  even  if  it  were  so  severe,  there  would  be  no  harm  in  it; 
for  if  a  law  is  entrusted  into  the  hands  of  the  people  at  large, 
whose  safety  and  prosperity  it  produces  and  guards,  then  an 
offence  against  it  is  the  more  atrocious  a  crime.  Hence,  if  the 
law  is  dispensed  by  judges  chosen  by  the  people,  and  in  the 
presence  of  the  people,  it  can  never  be  more  severe  than  the 
people  need  and  want  it.  As  a  general  thing  it  may  be  re- 
marked, that  it  appears  to  be  a  maxim  of  this  penal  law,  that 
the  law  itself  must  be  severe,  because  it  is  an  instruction  given 
to  the  community,  which  consists  of  all  classes  of  people ;  but 
its  application  must  be  mild,  and  bound  to  so  many  conditions, 
that  its  severity  be  not  a  practical  one.  So  we  read  Deut.  xxv, 
"  if  the  guilty  man  deserve  to  be  beaten,  then  the  judge  shall 
cause  him  to  lie  down,  and  to  be  beaten  before  his  face, 
according  to  the  degree  of  his  fault,  by  a  certain  number;  forty 
stripes  he  may  give  him,  not  more;  so  that  he  shall  not  exceed, 
and  beat  him  above  these,  with  too  many  stripes,  and  thy 
brother  be  thus  rendered  vile  before  thy  eyes.  As  the  best 
case  of  illustration  we  may  quote  the  law  concerning  the 
rebellious  son  (Deutr.  xxi,  18-22).  He  must  be  both  stubborn 
and  rebellious,  a  glutton  and  a  drunkard,  and  not  hearkening 
to  either  his  father  or  mother,  although  he  was  chastised;  such 
a  child  is  certainly  found  but  very  seldom.  Both  father  and 
mother  must  agree,  and  both  of  them  accuse  their  child  before 
the  court  of  justice,  and  if  the  court  condemn  him  to  death, 
they  are  the  first  who  must  execute  the  judgment  (Deutr.  xvii,  7). 
Such  parents  are  certainly  as  scarce  as  such  children.  It  is 
therefore  sure  that  a  case  of  this  kind  never  occurred;  this 
law  was  intended  to  the  effect  of  being  read,  and  to  show  that 
the  public  courts  are  bound  to  assist  the  parents,  if  required 
to  do  so,  in  their  family  government. 

This  brief  sketch  of  the  Mosaic  law  is  necessary  in  order  to 
understand  the  history  of  the   Israelitish  nation,  of  which  the 


PERIOD     I.  161 

Mosaic  law  is  the  foundation.  We  could  not  do  lull  justice  to 
the  subject,  as  this  requires  an  extra  work  of  considerable 
extent.  We  could  only  make  a  synopsis  of  the  whole,  as 
necessary  to  our  plan.  It  is  a  matter  of  astonishment  to  us, 
that  legislators  and  lawyers  study  ancient  laws,  and  still 
consider  the  Pentateuch  a  merely  religious  book,  so  that  the 
knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  is  considered  a  merely  theological 
affair.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  principles  of  jurispru- 
dence as  applicable  to  free  nations  are  in  the  Pentateuch,  and 
not  in  the  civil  law,  nor  in  the  codes  of  Lycurgus  or  Solon 
only.  What  lawyers  generally  term  natural  justice  is  not  in 
nature,  but  in  the  Pentateuch. 

XIII.    RELIGION. 

A  commonwealth,  without  any  sort  of  religion,  is  a  despot- 
ism, for  if  the  citizen  is  not  obedient  to  the  laws  from  a  reli- 
gious sense  of  duty,  the  laws  are  imposed  upon  him,  and  every 
imposition,  in  this  respect,  is  a  despotism.  The  sense  of  duty 
and  obedience  to  certain  laws  because  they  are  beneficial  to 
society,  though  they  may  be  inconvenient  or  injurious  to  the 
individual,  is  of  itself  a  respect  before  the  rights  of  man,  and 
before  truth;  but  if  there  is  no  moral  government  of  mankind, 
then  no  other  right  can  be  imagined  than  that  which  a  man 
takes  for  himself;  consequently  a  respect  before  the  rights  of 
others,  although  they  be  injurious  to  the  concerned  individual 
is  a  manifested  respect  before  the  moral  government  of  man- 
kind which  is  the  basis  of  religion,  the  fear  of  the  Lord; 
for  under  moral  government  of  mankind,  we  can  understand 
nothing  else  but  the  government  of  God.  A  commonwealth, 
without  a  religion  would  not  only  be  a  despotism,  but  it  would 
also  be  forced  to  resort  to  severity,  and  even  to  cruelty,  to  a 
system  of  espionage,  to  a  limitation  of  all  means  to  express 
ideas  and  views,  and  to  a  vigilant  watch  over  the  sentiments  of 
the  individuals;  for  the  law  can  only  command  or  prohibit, 
and  punish  the  violator,  or  reward  the  faithful  adherent. 
But  it  can  not  act  upon  the  sentiments  of  man;  it  can  not 
watch  over  thoughts  and  secret  actions ;  it  can  not  make  a  man 
good,  it  can  only  prevent  one  from  being  a  bad  man ;  it  can 
11 


162  APPENDIX    TO 

punish  for  bad  actions,  but  it  can  not  crush  their  source,  the 
evil  sentiments;  it  may  deter  the  criminal  by  the  severity  of 
the  punishments,  but  it  can  not  till  the  mind  with  a  sacred 
love  of  virtue  and  a  fear  of  vice  and  impurity,  all  of  which 
religion  alone  can  effect.  Yet  at  the  same  time  religion  itse.f 
maybe  converted  into  an  imposition,  to  a  source  of  corruption, 
to  an  instrument  of  violence,  as  we  find  plenty  of  examples  in 
history;  wherefore  it  naturally  must  be  the  care  of  legislators 
that  the  laws  be  supported  by  religion,  and  that  religion  itself 
be  not  corrupted  to  effect  an  end  contrary  to  that  designed. 
This  seems  to  be  the  principle  which  guided  Moses  in  respect 
to  religion,  which  we  must  consider  under  two  different 
heads,  viz:  The  spirit  of  religion,  and  the  practices  of  reli- 
gion. 

a.  The    Spirit   of  Religion. — Moses   did  not    teach   dogmas, 
which  must  be  believed ;  nor  has  the  Hebrew  language  a  term 
denoting  to  believe;  his  religious   dogmas   are  represented  as  a 
reasoning  from  facts,  or  from  analogy;  he  narrates  events  then 
commonly  known,  and  upon  them  he  bases  his  religious   theo- 
ries.   "  Thou  shalt  know  and  rejleit  in  thy  heart,  that  the  Lord 
is  God;    in  heaven  above  and  on  earth  beneath  is  none  besides 
him."     He  narrates  the  creation   of  the  world  by  God;  upon 
which  he  bases  the  dogma,  God  is  the  creator  of  the  universe. 
He  narrates  the  history  of  the  deluge,  of  Sedom   and  Amorah, 
of  Joseph's  fortune  in  Egypt,   of  the  exode;    upon  which  he 
bases  the  dogma,   God  is  the  governor  of  mankind  as   well  as 
of  the  material  universe,  Providence.     He  speaks  of  the  natu- 
ral blessings  which  God  bestowed  on  the  patriarchs  in  their 
domestic  employments,   of  the  plagues  which   God  sent   over 
Egypt,  of  the  manna,   the  quails,   the  water  from  the  rock; 
upon  which  he  bases  the  dogma,  God  is  the  preserver.     He 
speaks  of  the  rewards  bestowed  upon  Noah,   the  patriarchs, 
and    Joseph,    for  their  virtuous    lives,   and  of  the  punishment 
which  befel  Cain,   the  generation  of  the  deluge,   the  people  of 
Sedom  and  Amorah,  Pharaoh,  the  Egyptians  and  others,   upon 
which  he  bases  the  dogma,  God  loves  virtue  and  is  displeased  by 
vice;  he  rewards  the  virtuous  and  punishes  the  wicked;  his 


PERIOD  I.  163 

grace  and  his  displeasure  correspond  to  the   degree  of  piety  or 
impiety  of  the  recipient;  God  is  righteous  and  just.     Cain  re- 
pents  his  sin    and  is  pardoned;    Jacob  improves  his   conduct 
and   is  received  into  the   grace  of  God;  Pharaoh  also  is  par- 
doned several  times  upon   confessing  his  wrong,  and  promising 
to  do  right;  and  so  Moses  says  God  pardons  sin,  iniquity,   and 
transgression.     Whatever  he  says  about  God  is  the  consequence 
of  a  reasoning  from  facts,    wherefore  he  never  speaks  of  the 
essence    or   the    attributes   of  God,   he  only  speaks    of  God's 
actions,  as  they  may  be  deduced  from  an  observation  of  nature 
and  history.     The   remarkable  passage   (Exod.  xxxiii,   6,  7), 
does  not  contain  one  adjective,    but  merely  abstract  nouns  of 
actions,  and  should  be  rendered,   "Jehovah   is   Jehovah   (im- 
mutable) the  divine  power,  whose  actions  are  gracious,  benevo- 
lent,   long    suffering    and    abundant    of   benignity  and    truth. 
Showing  benignity   unto  the  thousands    (who   love    him  and 
keep  his  commandments),  forgiving  iniquity,  transgression  and 
sin  (who   repent  and  improve  their  conduct);  but  he  will   not 
hold  guiltless  (who    improve    not),    visiting   the    iniquity    of 
parents   on   children   and  children's  children  to  the  third  and 
fourth    generation."     He    forbids    making    an    image    of  God, 
because  "  You  have  not  seen  any  image  when  the   Lord  spake 
to  you."     He  never  deviates  from  this  principle,   and  therefore 
never  falls  into   illusive  conceptions  of  the  Supreme  Being,  as 
the  theologians  of  Egypt  and  India  did.     The  name  of  Jehovah 
itself  is  of  the  same   nature.     It  is   not  a  qualification  of  the 
divine  essence,  but  a  compound  of  terms   denoting  time   with- 
out end.     One  who  is  not  limited  by  time,    who  is  immutable. 
Zoroaster    gave   afterwards  the   same   name    to   the   Supreme 
Being,     This  was  certainly  the  best  method  of  guarding  the 
Israelites  against  illusory   speculations  on  the  nature  of  God; 
for  by  a  reasoning  from  facts  one  is   kept  upon   the  ground   of 
sober  observation,    which   endears  to  him   nature  and  history, 
and  almost  all  other  sciences,  as  the  leaves  of  the  great  book 
in  which  man  is  permitted  to  read  the  actions  of  God. 

On  the  same  principle  of  reasoning,  Moses  considered  man. 
The  generation   of  the   deluge  gave  him  the   proof,  that   the 


164  APPENDIX    TO 

inclinations  of  man  are  wicked  from  his  youth,  the  age  when 
the  sensual  passions  awake  in  their  full  vigor,  and  when  he 
comes  into  a  closer  contact  with  society;  wherefore  society 
must  be  improved  to  the  benefit  of  the  individual,  and  the 
passions  must  be  tamed,  so  that  they  overrule  not  the  spirit, 
the  intellect  and  the  will.  God  held  direct  communication 
with  Adam,  Cain,  Noah,  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob  and  Moses; 
consequently,  man  is  also  a  great  and  eminent  being,  an  image, 
a  likeness,  a  son  of  God,  who  may  directly  perceive  the  voice  of 
God.  This  consciousness  of  his  own  value  Moses  wished  to 
impress  upon  the  whole  nation  of  Israel:  "  I  wish  that  all  the 
people  of  the  Lord  were  prophets,  that  God  put  his  spirit  upon 
them."  Cain  and  Abel  brought  of  their  own  accord  sacrifices 
to  God.  So  did  Noah  after  he  had  come  out  from  the  ark.  So 
did  Abraham  several  times.  Consequently,  the  human  heart 
in  its  uncorrupted  state  is  grateful  to  its  Marker,  and  relies 
confidently  on  him  in  the  hours  of  peril  and  danger,  as  Jacob 
did  many  times,  and  as  Abraham  did  when  his  kinsman,  Lot,  was 
carried  off.  The  heart  must  be  guarded  against  corrupt  influ- 
ences from  without.  The  human  heart,  on  account  of  its 
presentiments  of  a  Supreme  Being,  is  inclined  to  superstition 
and  idolatry,  if  the  intellect  is  not  sufficiently  cultivated  to 
direct  the  sentiments.  So  the  actions  of  the  nations,  which 
he  saw,  Israel  not  excepted,  informed  him.  Therefore,  all 
causes  of  superstition  must  be  removed  out  of  his  sight,  and 
intellectual  capacities  must  be  indefinitely  cultivated;  where- 
fore Moses  was  so  strict  against  idols,  temples,  groves,  and 
even  against  their  names ;  and  wherefore  he  again  and  again 
recommended  to  know,  to  read  the  law,  to  teach  it  to  the 
children,  and  to  speak  of  it  as  much  as  possible.  Love  is 
natural  to  the  human  heart;  the  child,  youth,  virgin,  man, 
woman,  and  the  gray-headed  man,  love.  No  man  can  exist 
without  it.  Therefore,  Moses  bade  them  to  love  God,  to  love 
each  other  and  also  their  enemies,  to  love  the  stranger;  to 
cultivate  this  natural  affection  to  its  utmost  capacity.  So 
Moses  did  not  depart  one  step  from  the  broad  field  of  observa- 
tion,  and   therefore  he  knows    nothing  of  all  those  differen 


PKRIOD    I.  165 

theories  on  the  creation  of  man,  of  which  mythological  writers 
made  mention,  that  the  spirits  revolted  against  God  and  were 
expelled  from  Heaven,  and  imprisoned  in  bodies  of  clay,  to 
pass  through  a  certain  number  of  purifying  regions  in  different 
bodies,  which  almost  all  nations  of  antiquity  believed;  or  that 
man  must  wander  from  star  to  star  until  he  finally  arrives  at 
the  Supreme  Being,  in  which  he  is  absorbed,  as  the  Zabians 
supposed.  He  reasoned  from  facts;  he  started  from  observa- 
tions on  nature  and  history,  and  this  excluded,  eo  ipso,  every 
extravagance  of  that  nature. 

It  must  be  confessed,  that  it  was  not  in  the  province  of 
Moses  to  speak  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  or  of  a  future 
reward  and  punishment.  Consistently  with  his  mode  of  reason- 
ing he  could  not  speak  of  them ;  and  the  first  step  beyond  this 
method  would  have  thrown  widely  open  the  gates  to  all  the 
vague  speculations  which  then  disgraced  the  nations,  and  held 
them  in  a  state  of  bondage  both  morally  and  physically.  He 
had  yet  a  special  reason  not  to  speak  of  the  eternal  life.  It  is 
well  known  to  every  reader  of  history,  that  all  the  nations  of 
antiquity  believed  in  a  future  state  of  existence,  each  one  in 
its  own  manner.*  The  Egyptians  especially,  of  whom  Herodotus 
informs  us,  that  they  were  the  first  who  built  altars  and  erected 
statues  and  temples  to  the  gods ;  the  first  who  taught  that  the  soul 
of  man  is  immortal  ;|  and  of  whom  Lucian  tells  us,  that  they  were 
said  to  be  the  first  who  had  a  knowledge  of  the  gods, J  taught 
this  doctrine,  in  the  form  of  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  It 
can  not  be  supposed,  that  either  Moses  was  ignorant  of  it,  or 
that  the  Israelites,  who  were  so  much  addicted  to  Egyptian 
superstition,  did  not  know  or  not  believe  the  doctrine  of  im- 
mortality and  future  reward  and  punishment.  But,  as  the 
ancients  in  their  theology  deified  the  whole  universe,   so  that 

*  Warburton's  Divine  Legation  of  Moses,  vol.  i,  b.  ii;  Plutarch,  Vita 
Lucul.  Edit.  Francof  torn,  ii,  p.  1125,  E.  Plato,  Repub.  lib.  xi,  p.  364,  E., 
torn,  ii,  edit.  Steph.  1578.  Cicero  Tuscul.  Disp.,  lib.  i,  cap.  16,  torn.  ii. 
Seneca  Eph.  117. 

f  Herodotus'  Euterpe,  cap.  4  and  123, 

J  De  Dea  Syria,  sect.  ii. 


Iti6  APPENDIX   TO 

every  particle  of  matter  was  but  a  part  of  the  infinite  deity, 
and  that  every  natural  process,  every  human  thought  and  also 
every  word  spoken  was  but  a  manifestation  of  the  Deity;  so 
that  there  was  no  room  left  for  human  volition  and  actions, 
and  consequently,  there  was  no  real  distinction  between  vice 
and  virtue,  the  most  eminent  of  which  was  inaction,  as  it  is 
yet  in  our  days  the  belief  of  the  Brahmins :  so  they  reasoned 
in  regard  to  immortality,  making  this  world  to  be  a  mere  abode 
for  punishment,  this  life  as  merely  devoted  to  a  purification  of 
the  soul  by  ascetic  practices,  and  by  serving  the  gods  in  the 
most  revolting  manner,  in  order  to  be  finally  absorbed  in  the 
Deity,  or  to  be  after  thousands  of  years  reunited  with  this 
.habitation  of  clay.  This  system,  it  is  evident,  turned  the 
attention  of  the  nations  from  the  present  state  of  life,  made 
them  indifferent  towards  virtue  and  justice,  and  assigned  the 
political  power  to  the  hands  of  the  priests  in  Egypt,  of  the 
Brahmins  in  India,  of  the  emperor,  the  son  of  Tien  in  China, 
and  to  the  Chaldees  among  the  ancient  Zabians.  To  the  slaves 
especially,  as  many  of  the  Israelites  were  in  Egypt,  this  system 
must  have  been  welcome ;  it  promised  them  a  rich  indemnifica- 
tion in  another  state  of  life,  for  what  they  suffered  in  this  life. 
Moses  opposed  this  system  by  a  sound  reasoning  from  facts. 
He  taught  that  man  is  free ;  he  may  choose  either  virtue  or 
vice;  that  God  finds  pleasure  in  virtuous  actions,  in  an  honest 
industry,  and  that  he  rewards  it  with  his  grace  and  blessing; 
that  he  dislikes  vice,  corruption  and  inaction,  and  punishes  it 
with  his  curse  and  his  displeasure.  Moses  gave  a  sanctity 
to  virtue,  to  industry  and  labor,  and  awakened  his  people  to 
the  performance  of  human  duties  as  men  and  citizens,  without 
which  a  despotical  government  would  have  inevitably  followed; 
he  did  not  deny  the  dogma  of  future  rewards  and  punishments ; 
he  at  once  declared  that  man  was  created  in  the  image  of  God, 
that  man  may  hold  communication  with  God,  that  man  is  a 
son  of  God,  that  God  kills  and  revives,  that  God  is  most 
benign  and  gracious.  All  of  which  confirmed  the  dogma  of 
immortality.  But  he  was  not  arrogant  enough  to  look  into  a 
world,  the  nature  of  which  he  could  not  perceive  by  a  reason- 


PKU1UD  U  167 

ing  from  facts;  he  was  wise  enough  to  sanctify  this  life  by 
which  alone  a  future  life  can  be  obtained;  he  was  prudent 
enough  to  restore  his  people  to  this  world,  to  give  them  liberty, 
freedom  of  thought  and  action,  and  to  guard  them  against 
extravagant  speculations  and  irrational  superstitions.  The 
doctrine  of  immortality  was  known  to  and  believed  by  all  of 
them,  for  if  they  had  never  heard  it,  they  would  have  felt  it; 
it  is  innate  to  the  mind,  and  therefore  all  nations  were  aware 
of  it.  Moses  never  told  them  that  there  is  a  Supreme  Being, 
because  they  knew  it;  he  never  told  them  to  pray,  when 
their  heart  is  inclined  to  it;  for  man  will  do  it  without  com- 
mand: so  it  was  entirely  unnecessary  to  speak  unto  them  on 
immortality. 

It  has  been  stated  above,  that  the  facts  which  Moses 
recorded  convinced  him,  that  it  is  the  innate  desire  of  man  to 
worship  God;  but  there  the  heathen,  in  accordance  with  their 
system,  resorted  to  the  contemplative  life,  to  ascetic  practices, 
to  savage  and  immoral  games,  to  man  sacrifice,  to  the  sacrifice 
of  their  own  children,  against  all  of  which  Moses  spoke  in 
bold  and  precise  terms.  The  whole  of  the  divine  worship 
which  he  recommended  may  be  reduced  to  the  command,  to 
cultivate  carefully  the  moral  and  intellectual  capacities,  "  You 
shall  be  holy,  for  the  Lord  your  God  is  holy;"  and  to  assist 
others  in  doing  the  same.  All  religious  practices  contained  in 
the  Pentateuch  have  this  one  end  and  aim.  A  careful  study 
of  the  law  was  repeatedly  recommended  by  Moses;  and  this 
law,  as  we  have  attempted  to  show,  is  connected  with  all 
branches  of  moral,  mental  and  physical  sciences,  to  which  the 
study  of  it  inevitably  induced,  and  which  is  made  a  condition 
to  comprehend  and  appreciate  it.  This,  Moses  set  in  the 
place  of  illusory  contemplation  and  vague  speculations.  But 
the  study  of  the  law  is  not  the  end  and  aim  of  it.  The  actions 
of  man  are  the  principal  objects  to  direct  which  the  law  is 
given.  Divine  service  consists  in  obeying  the  law,  in  doing 
what  is  good,  noble  and  useful,  and  reforming  the  heart  to 
desire  the  same;  and  shunning  what  is  bad,  ignoble,  or  hurtful, 
and  educating  the  heart  to  despise  the  mean,  the  bad,    and 


168  APPENDIX    TO 

ignoble  desire.  There  is  no  distinction  between  civil,  political, 
moral,  or  religious  laws;  all  of  them  are  equally  sacred,  and 
all  of  them  must  be  obeyed  bona  fide,  and  acted  accordingly; 
because  God  commanded  all  of  them.  "And  these  command- 
ments, statutes  and  judgments,  which  the  Lord  your  God  has 
commanded  to  teach  you.  to  do  in  the  land,  to  which  you  pass 
over  to  possess  it,  that  you  may  fear  the  Lord  thy  God,  to 
observe  all  his  statutes  and  commandments  which  I  command 
thee,  thou  and  thy  son  and  thy  son's  son  all  the  days  of  thy 
life,  and  that  thy  days  be  prolonged;  thou  shalt  hear,  0 
Israel,  and  observe  to  do,  that  he  may  do  well  unto  thee,  that 
you  may  multiply  exceedingly,  as  the  Lord  the  God  of  thy 
fathers  has  spoken  unto  thee,  a  land  flowing  with  milk  and 
honey"  (Dentr.  vi.  1-3).  As  the  chief  example  of  their  actions 
he  recommended  to  them  God,  as  he  is  revealed  to  us  in  nature 
and  history.  "  You  shall  walk  after  the  Lord  your  God."  As 
the  only  means  to  reach  human  perfection  he  recommended  to 
them  to  fear  the  Lord,  which  will  cause  them  to  walk  in  his 
ways  or  to  imitate  his  actions,  which  will  incline  their  heart 
to  love  him  and  to  serve  him  with  all  the  heart  and  mind 
(Dentr.  x,  12),  which  he  took  to  be  the  moral  perfection  of 
man.  He  desired  them  to  be  intelligent,  humane,  kind,  pure 
and  active,  because  God  desires  them  to  be  so.  This  is  the 
religion  of  Moses. 

This  may  be  reduced  to  the  following  principles : 

1.  There  is  but  one  God,  who  is  the  creator,  preserver  and 
governor  of  mankind,  and  the  whole  of  the  universe;  we  have 
no  knowledge  of  his  essence  or  the  attributes  of  his  essence. 
We  are  but  permitted  to  form  a  conception  of  him  by  his  works, 
which  show  us  his  infinite  wisdom,  power,  justice,  goodness, 
and  an  infinite  love  which  pervades  all  things. 

2.  Man  is  God's  image;  the  superior  of  the  created  beings 
the  next  to  God,  who  watches  over  him,  rewarding  him  when 
virtuous,  and  punishing  him  when  vicious.  A  man  is  virtuous 
when  he  lives  obedient  to  the  law;  he  is  vicious  when  he  dis- 
obeys the  law.  Man's  will  is  perfectly  free,  and  his  natural 
inclinations  are  perfectly  good,  being  the  work  of  God;  if  he  is 


MOD   i. 

not  misled  by  external  influent  ill  do  what  is  good  and 

right. 

The  k no.'  'ence  and  operations 

:y  man.  in  order  to  have  an  example  for 
imitation;  an  ideal  for  his  endeavors,  and  a  sure  foundation  in 
the   acknowledgment  of  truth.       Where  te   acquirement 

of  this  knowledge  is  the  principal  duty  of  man. 

4.  The  end  and  aim  of  all  actions  must  he  to  become  holy, 
that  is.  to  purify  and  extend  the  natural  affections  of  love  and 
kindness,  to  elevate  the  moral  .sentiments,  and  to  develop 
the  mental  faculties  to  their  utmost  capacity,  which  is  the 
destiny  of  man  on  earth.  But  this  end  can  be  reached  only  in 
the  midst  of  civilized  society,  and  only  by  means  which  are  at 
the  same  time  useful  to  our  fellow-man,  and  conducive  to  that 
principal  end.  Those  means  are  prescribed  in  the  law; 
wherefore  it  must  be  studied  diligently  and  carefully. 

5.  The  sinner  may  be  restored  to  his  human  dignity  if  he 
either  truly  repent  of  his  wickedness  fand  consequently  im- 
proving his  moral  nature,  restores  himself  to  his  human  dignity; ; 
or  if  he  be  purified  by  the  punishment  of  Providence  and  he 
acknowledge,  that  such  punishment  was  just,  and  intended  to 
restore  hirn  to  piety;  or  also  if  the  court  of  justice  punish 
him  agreeably  to  the  law,  and  he  then  chooses  the  path  of 
righteousness. 

6.  Religion  must  make  man  happy,  useful,  and  good,  not  by 
means  of  an  imaginary  belief,  but  by  the  knowledge  and  love 
of  truth;  not  by  ascetic  practices  or  inaction,  but  by  doing 
what  is  right  and  shunning  what  is  evil. 

7.  The  nation  of  Israel  has  yet  this  peculiar  religious  duty: 
to  guard  and  promulgate  the  revealed  truths. 

Many  other  doctrines  and  principles  have  been  deduced  from 
the  Mosaic  dispensation;  but  we  are  unable  to  find  anything  in 
the  Pentateuch  contrary  to  these  rational  principles  or  not 
contained  in  them. 

b.  The  Forms  of  Religion  or  Outward  Religion. — In  respect  of 
outward  religion,  Moses  appears  to  have  been  guided  by  the 
following  principle :  men  must  be  given  means  to  demonstrate 


170  APPENDIX    TO 

by  his  actions  the  love  and  veneration  to  God,  which  inspire 
his  mind,  and  also  other  means  which  awaken  those  sentiments 
in  him  if  they  are  in  a  dormant  condition.  Outward  religion 
must  be  conducive  to  one  of  these  results,  aside  of  which  it 
has  no  signification.  The  means  to  those  ends  must  be  satis- 
factory to  the  worshiper;  he  must  be  accustomed  to  regard 
them  with  a  sacred  awe,  if  they  shall  be  efficient  at  all. 
Therefore  Moses  did  not  substitute  new  ceremonies  in  place  of 
those  to  which  they  were  accustomed  in  Egypt;  he  only  re- 
formed them  ingeniously,  to  represent  the  pure  ideas  of 
monotheism  and  theocracy. 

In  considering  outward  religion,  according  to  Moses,  we 
come  first  of  all  to  the  national  sanctuary. 

I.  THE  TABERNACLE  OF  THE  CONGREGATION  AND 
ITS  SERVANTS. 

In  the  tabernacle  must  first  be  remarked  the  court,  which 
was  one  hundred  cubits  long  from  east  to  west,  and  fifty  cubits 
broad  from  north  to  south,  with  twenty  pillars  on  each  of  the 
broad  sidgs,  and  ten  pillars  on  the  west  side,  and  six  on  the 
east  side,  where  was  the  entrance.  A  curtain  of  fine  linen  went 
round  all  the  pillars,  fastened  by  cords  to  the  rings  on  the 
pillars,  hanging  down  in  a  flowing  manner.  The  height  of 
this  court  was  but  five  cubits.  The  front  was  adorned  with 
silver  pillars,  while  the  others  were  of  brass,  and  having  an 
entry  twenty  cubits  broad,  which  was  covered  by  a  curtain 
composed  of  purple,  scarlet,  blue  and  fine  linen,  embroidered 
with  different  figures  excepting  the  figures  of  animals.  In  this 
court  was  the  Mishcan,  dwelling,  the  residence  of  the  king, 
the  abode  of  God.  This  was  ten  cubits  high  and  broad,  and 
thirty  cubits  long,  enclosed  on  three  sides  by  boards  of  shittim 
wood,  which  rested  on  silver  sockets  which  were  overlaid  with 
gold.  The  bars  which  by  means  of  golden  rings,  through 
which  they  were  put,  connected  the  boards,  were  of  shittim 
wood  overlaid  with  gold.  The  inside  was  divided  into 
two  departments,  the  one  often  cubits  and  the  other  of  twenty 
cubits  length,  which  were  separated  from   each    other   by  a 


PERIOD    I.  171 

curtain  and  four  pillars;  the  smaller  or  second  department  was 
called  the  most  holy,  sanctum  sanctorum,  such  as  they  had  in 
almost  all  the  Egyptian  temples.  The  iirst  and  largest  depart- 
ment was  called  the  tabernacle.*  The  most  holy  place 
contained  nothing  but  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  in  which  was 
nothing  besides  the  two  tables  of  stone.  This  place  was 
accessible  only  to  the  high  priest,  and  only  once  a  year  on  the 
tenth  day  of  the  seventh  month.  In  the  tabernacle,  accessible 
to  the  priests  only,  stood  the  golden  altar,  where  the  incense 
was  offered  twice  a  day.  On  the  north  side  of  the  altar  stood 
the  golden  table  with  twelve  cakes,  which  were  changed  weekly, 
and  upon  which  were  two  vials  of  frankincense ;  on  the  south 
side  stood  the  golden  candlestick  with  its  seven  lamps,  kept  in 
good  order  by  the  priest.  In  the  court,  accessible  to  every  one 
who  was  pure,  stood  the  altar  of  brass,  upon  which  the  sacrifices 
were  burnt,  and  the  laver  of  copper  resting  on  a  foot  of  copper, 
in  which  the  priests  washed  their  hands  and  feet.  That  all 
this  was  made  on  the  Egyptian  style  has  been  so  often  told  by 
modern  archaeologists,  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  repeat  it. 
Even  Josephus  when  speaking  of  the  golden  table  says,  "  like 
those  of  Delphi."  But  it  must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  this 
tabernacle  represented  ideas  quite  different  from  those  which 
an  Egpytian  temple  did.  The  most  holy  is  certainly  something 
similar  to  the  mysterious  temple  at  Sais ;  but  here  was  not  the 
veiled  image  of  Sais,  here  was,  every  body  knew  it,  the  ark 
containing  the  two  tables,  which  were  sacred  not  by  themselves, 
but  by  the  divine  principles  engraved  upon  them.  It  was  the 
people's  charter  of  liberty;  it  was  the  ground  work  of  civiliza- 
tion, which  made  the  place  sacred.  This  was  not  to  deceive 
and  blindfold  the  mass,  as  the  Egyptian  mysteries  were,  and 
to  give  an  unlimited  sway  to  superstition  and  priestcraft.  It 
was  to  influence  the  community  with  a  sacred  reverence  of 
principles  on  which  their  national  and  personal  prosperity 
depended;  they  knew  what  was  deposited  in  that  sacred  place, 

*  Concerning  the  roofing,  curtains  and  other  particulars,  read  Exodus  xxxv 
-xl;  and  Josephus's  Antiquities,  B.  iii,  c.  vi. 


172  APPENDIX    TO 

and  learned  to  respect  it  by  the  sanctity  ascribed  to  the  place, 
which  even  the  high  priest  was  permitted  to  enter  but  once  a 
year,  when  making  atonement  for  the  people.  Moses  sur° 
rounded  the  most  sacred  ideas  with  a  corresponding  reverence. 
The  veil  itself,  which  separated  the  holy  from  the  most  holy, 
and  the  other  curtains,  were  embroidered  with  different  figures, 
but,  as  Josephus  expressly  remarks,  not  with  the  figures  of 
animals.  Moses  let  them  have  figures,  as  they  were  accustomed 
to  it;  but  no  such  figures,  as  inclined  the  mind  towards 
Egyptian  feticism.  Before  the  curtain  was  the  holy  place, 
which  Josephus  said  was  to  represent  the  earth,  while  the 
most  holy  was  to  represent  the  heaven.  There  stood  significant 
symbols;  first  the  golden  candlestick  with  the  seven  lamps,  in 
order  to  remember  that  God,  the  invisible  spirit,  had  created 
the  world  in  seven  days,  and  that  light  was  the  first  creature; 
and  these  lights  burned  at  night  only,  as  in  every  other  temple, 
because  Helios  flames  his  fires  over  the  hours  of  day,  and  were 
significant  of  the  then  general  view,  that  God  is  enthroned  in 
light,  and  there  is  no  night  before  him.  On  the  other  side 
stood  the  golden  table,  "  like  those  of  Delphi"  consequently 
like  those  also  of  Egyptian  temples,  upon  which  was  the 
shewbread.  While  the  lamp  taught  the  important  lesson  "God 
is  the  creator  of  the  universe,"  the  table  imparted  the  lesson, 
"  God  preserves  the  universe;"  He  gives  food  to  the  millions 
of  creatures,  who  depend  on  his  mercy.  In  the  most  holy 
place  there  was  expressed  the  idea,  "  God  governs  the 
universe."  Here  then  were  the  three  fundamental  ideas  of  the 
Mosaic  religion.  And  there  stood  the  altar  of  gold,  which  was 
to  teach  the  significant  doctrine,  "Man,  thou  shalt  worship 
this  God,  who  is  the  creator,  governor  and  preserver  of  the 
universe."  The  worship  was  simple,  a  handful  of  incense  was 
burned  at  morning  and  evening;  because  it  is  not  the  thing 
sacrificed,  but  the  heart,  the  mind  of  him  who  appears  before 
God,  that  constitutes  the  real  value  of  it.  So  Moses  represented 
eternal  ideas  by  means  of  Egyptian  materials.  Around  this 
tabernacle  was  the  court  of  the  people,  and  there  stood  but  one 
altar,  upon  which   sacrifices  were   offered.     But  there  were  so 


PERIOD    I.  173 

man}-  limitations  as  Maimonides  well  remarks,*  that  it  was 
almost  a  matter  of  impossibility  to  sacrifice  an  animal.  The 
man  who  entered  the  sacred  court  had  to  be  clean,  not  having 
touched  that  day  a  carcass,  not  having  had  sexual  communica- 
tion, or  a  sexual  or  leprous  disease;  if  this  was  the  case  he 
had  to  keep  his  time  of  purification,  bathe  himself  in  water, 
change  his  garments  before  he  could  enter  the  sacred  place, 
which  was  open  only  at  day  time.  There  were  but  three  priests, 
Aaron  and  his  two  sons,  and  the  ceremonies  of  every  sacrifice 
took  a  long  time;  still,  none  of  the  principal  sacrifices  could 
be  offered  without  an  officiating  priest,  or  at  any  other  place  than 
on  the  altar  of  the  court  of  the  tabernacle.  So  Moses  did  not 
at  once  abolish  this  ancient  custom,  because  it  was  sacred  to 
them;  but  he  limited  it  so  much,  that  it  must  gradually  abolish 
itself.  The  Levites  and  the  priests  were  dressed  as  the  priests 
of  Egypt,  which  was  calculated  to  fill  with  a  sacred  awe  the 
mind  of  those  who  were  accustomed  to  the  Egyptian  form  of 
worship.  But  the  priests  were  not  permitted  to  imitate  the 
ridiculous,  demoralizing  and  irrational  ceremonies  of  the 
Egyptian  priests;  nor  were  they  given  any  political  power. 
They  were  restricted  to  divine  service  and  divine  instruction 
only;  and  a  set  of  simple  ceremonies  was  prescribed  unto 
them,  which  they  could  not  alter  nor  amend.  The  Levite,  or 
the  priest  officiating  in  the  tabernacle,  had  to  be  free  of  every 
bodily  blemish,  so  that  his  personality  make  a  good  impression 
upon  the  worshiper.  He  had  to  be  educated  for  his  function,  in 
order  not  to  profane  the  sanctuary  by  errors  or  mistakes. 
Song  and  music,  which  exercise  the  greatest  influence  upon  the 
mind,  were  integral  parts  of  the  divine  service;  the  Levites 
performed  this  part,  and  were  schooled  to  this  vocation.  As 
regards  the  instrumental  music,  Moses  adopted  not  only  those 
instruments  which  were  deemed  sacred,  as  the  cystrum  and 
other  instruments  used  in  Egyptian  temples ;  but  for  particular 
occasions  he  added  the  trumpet  and  trombone.  Every  body 
knows  what  a  strong  influence  those  instruments  exercise  upon 

*  Morah  Nebughim  iii,  $  47. 


174  APPENDIX  TO 

the  mind  of  a  simple  man.  Thus  every  thing  in  the  tabernacle 
was  calculated  to  enliven  the  religious  sentiments,  which  is 
the  first  problem  of  a  divine  service.  Moses  maintained  the 
Egyptian  forms  because  they  were  sacred  to  the  people;  but  he 
reconstructed  them  to  represent  the  pure  and  sacred  monotheism 
of  the  patriarchs,  which  was  a  grand  piece  of  labor,  testifying 
of  the  ingenuity,  prudence  and  honest  designs  of  Moses.  The 
clothes  of  the  high  priest  were  undoubtedly  in  the  Egyptian 
style ;  but  they  were  symbolically  to  represent  ideas  foreign  to 
the  Egyptian  system;  he  wore  upon  his  forehead  a  plate  of 
pure  gold,  upon  which  there  were  engraved  the  words  "  Holy 
to  Jehovah;"  he  was  consecrated  to  the  service  of  the  One  and 
Invisible  God,  whose  glory  fills  the  tabernacle,  and  whose 
omniscience  looks  into  the  hearts  of  his  servants;  this 
plate  was  worn  upon  the  head  of  the  high  priest  to  signify 
that  his  whole  being,  his  heart  and  his  mind,  his  sentiments 
and  his  thoughts,  were  subject  to  God,  whose  servant  he 
was;  he  wore  upon  his  breast  the  breastplate  of  judgment, 
undoubtedly  a  commonly  acknowledged  representation  of 
justice;  and  upon  this  breastplate  were  twelve  precious  stones, 
each  of  which  bore  the  inscription  of  one  of  the  names  of  the 
tribes  of  Israel.  This  breastplate  told  the  high  priest  that  he 
was  appointed  to  bear  upon  his  heart  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel, 
to  live  for  them,  to  love  them,  and  to  watch  that  justice  be 
done  to  each  of  them.  This  breastplate  was  fastened  to  the 
ephod,  in  which  the  names  of  the  twelve  tribes  were  united 
upon  the  shoulders  of  the  high  priest,  engraved  on  the  two 
stones,  which  rested  on  his  shoulder,  to  signify  that  it  was  his 
duty  to  unite  the  house  of  Israel  under  the  dominion  of  God ; 
he  was  the  bearer  of  the  urim,  emblem  of  enlightenment,  and 
tumim,  emblem  of  innocence  and  perfection;  no  superstition 
should  have  dominion  over  him ;  truth  is  perceived  at  the  rays 
of  enlightenment.  No  ambition,  no  desire  to  govern,  no  brutal 
passions  should  degrade  him.  The  fear  of  the  Lord,  justice, 
patriotism,  enlightenment  and  innocence  spoke  symbolically 
from  the  attire  of  the  high  priest ;  and  if  he  acted  accordingly, 
he  was  the  oracle  of  the  nation.    Moses  gave  to  the  people  a  home 


PERIOD    I.  175 

oracle,  and  in  correspondence  with  the  whole  of  his  system,  he 
gave  them  not  a  blind  idol,  but  a  man;  he  restored  man  to 
his  wonted  dignity:  it  is  with  man  and  not  with  the  idol  that 
God  communicates.  This  oracle  was  merely  for  national  pur- 
poses, and  was  then  permitted  to  answer  only  when  asked  by 
the  highest  authorities  of  the  nation.  The  high  priest  was  a 
private  counsellor  of  the  highest  authorities  of  the  nation. 

2.  THE  SACRIFICES. 

As  to  the  sacrifices  which  Moses  ordered,  it  must  be  observed, 
that  there  were  two  daily  sacrifices;  one  in  the  morning,  and 
one  in  the  evening,  to  which  additional  sacrifices  were  added 
on  the  festivals  and  new-moon  days.  These  sacrifices  were 
brought  in  the  name  and  on  behalf  of  the  whole  nation,  so 
that  the  sacrifices  of  the  individuals  were  virtually  abolished. 
Still  it  was  not  exactly  prohibited  to  bring  a  sacrifice;  but  it 
was  attended,  as  we  stated  above,  with  a  great  many  difficul- 
ties, so  that  it  must  have  been  a  rare  case,  that  one  brought  a 
sacrifice.  At  least  it  could  not  happen  that  more  than  one  out 
of  ten  thousand  brought  a  sacrifice  every  year  in  the  tabernacle. 
Among  the  sacrifices  of  the  individuals  was  the  olah,  or  burnt 
offering,  which  was  called  so  because  the  whole  of  it,  the  skin 
excepted,  was  burnt ;  this  was  an  atonement  for  having  neglect- 
ed to  comply  with  the  positive  commandments  of  the  Bible. 
Shelamim,  or  peace  offering,  and  todah,  or  thank  offering, 
were  brought  either  in  order  to  pray  God  for  a  favor,  or  to 
thank  him  for  one,  or  on  account  of  a  vow.  Only  part  of  it 
was  burnt,  part  of  it  belonged  to  the  priests,  and  part  of  it  to 
him  who  brought  it.  The  hatath,  or  sin  offering,  was  brought 
if  one  unwittingly  violated  a  prohibitive  command,  which  if 
committed  willfully  the  law  punished  with  death.  If  it  was 
the  sacrifice  of  the  high  priest,  or  of  the  governor  of  the 
people,  it  was  totally  burnt.  If  it  was  the  sacrifice  of  the 
prince  of  a  tribe  or  of  another  individual,  it  was  treated  as  a 
peace  offering,  with  the  exception,  however,  that  all  the  flesh 
belonged  to  the  priests.  The  asham  or  the  offering  of  tres- 
pass, was  brought,  if  one  had  unintentionally  violated  his  oath, 


176  APPENDIX    TO 

or  head  unwittingly  given  false  testimony,  or  was  unclean,  and 
not  knowing  it  went  into  the  sanctuary;  or  had  unwittingly 
taken  what  belonged  to  the  sanctuary  and  made  restitution  for 
it,  or  if  he  held  his  neighbor's  property  in  an  illegal  way. 
which  he  repented  of  and  restored.  The  Asham  was  treated 
as  the  second  kind  of  Hatath.  Besides  these  sacrifices  there 
were  those  of  the  mother's  sacrifice  (Levit.  xii,  9-8);  the 
sacrifice  of  the  leprous  after  he  was  purified  (ibid  xiv,  10-32) 
and  the  saccrifice  of  the  Nazir  (Numb.  vi).  These  sacrifices 
were  either  bullocks,  cows,  heifers,  goats,  sheep,  turtle  doves, 
or  young  pigeons,  the  foremost  of  the  sacred  animals  of  Egypt. 
Moses  desired  to  dethrone  those  demoralizing  deities;  but 
they  stood  too  high  in  the  estimation  of  the  people,  and  he  left 
to  them  part  of  their  dignity,  selecting  them  for  sacrifices  of 
the  Lord.  But  at  the  same  time  he  made  this  superstition 
harmless.  He  also  gave  them  offerings  of  flour,  oil,  wine  and 
incense,  similar  offerings  being  made  by  all  the  agricultural 
nations  of  old.  He  prohibited  the  libations  of  honey,  which 
was  offered  to  the  sun;  and  of  the  leavend  cakes  which  also 
were  offered  to  the  sun;  and,  as  Pliny  said,  "Nulla  sacra 
conficiuntur  sine  mala  salsa,"  which  is  reckoned  to  be  a  very 
ancient  custom.  Moses  maintained  the  custom  of  having  salt 
as  the  symbol  of  constancy,  at  every  sacrifice.  The  first 
fruits  were  sacrificed,  as  among  all  other  nations. 

This  short  sketch  of  the  sacrifices  is  sufficient  to  show,  that 
Moses  did  not  invent  the  custom  of  sacrificing,  but  that  he 
only  modified  the  custom,  as  it  was  practiced  before.  Still 
there  was  a  great  reform  in  the  Mosaic  system  of  sacrifices. 
Among  the  heathens  different  animals  and  fruits  were  sacrificed 
to  different  gods.  Among  the  Greeks,  who  learned  their  mode 
of  worship  from  the  Egyptians,  oil  was  offered  to  Pluto,  honey 
to  the  sun,  the  dove  to  Venus,  the  goat  to  Bacchus,  &c.  Mo- 
ses reduced  the  system  to  suit  the  monotheism  of  the  patriarchs, 
without  designing  to  deprive  the  people  of  the  means  to  express 
their  repentence,  obligation,  gratitude  or  love  towards  God. 
The  most  abominable  practices  among  the  heathens  wrere  the 
games  after  the  sacrifices,  which  were  fraught  with  all   sorts 


PERIOD    I.  177 

of  immorality.  Moses  prohibited  them  at  once.  The  one  who 
brought  the  sacrifice  laid  his  hand  upon  the  animal,  and  con- 
fessed the  cause  of  his  bringing  it,  upon  which  the  priest 
could  instruct  him  on  the  subject.  The  meat  of  the  thank- 
offerings  was  to  be  eaten  in  purity,  with  the  sacred  cakes,  and 
in  one  day,  and,  as  it  appears,  without  using  intoxicating 
drinks.  Only  the  peace-offering  could  be  eaten  for  two  days. 
So  Moses  left  to  them  all  the  elements  of  divine  worship,  to 
which  they  were  in  Egypt  accustomed,  that  tended  either  to 
impress  the  mind  with  pious  and  moral  ideas,  or  served  to 
express  the  sentiments  of  the  heart.  But  he  modified  them  in 
such  a  skillful  manner,  that  they  represented  the  most  sub- 
lime ideas,  and  becamo  conducive  to  piety,  morality  and 
patriotism,  and  to  their  own  gradual  extinction. 

It  was  the  opinion  of  some  of  the  ancient  rabbins,  that 
the  heights  so  often  mentioned  in  the  next  periods  of  history, 
were  not  sanctioned  by  the  Mosaic  law;  but  the  passage  con- 
cerning them  (Exodus  xx,  21-23)  is  clearly  to  the  effect,  that 
Moses  prohibited  only  the  making  at  home  of  such  sacrifices 
as  should  be  brought  to  the  tabernacle.  The  priests  received 
from  the  sacrifices  made  at  home,  the  shoulder,  the  two  cheeks, 
and  the  maw  (Deatr.  xviii,  3),  which  certainly  could  not 
relate  to  every  animal  which  was  killed  for  food.  The  cause 
of  the  objection  made  against  those  heights  by  the  later  pro- 
phets (Samuel  was  not  opposed  to  the  practice)  will  be 
noticed  in  the  proper  place.  It  can  not  be  imagined  that 
Moses  gave  them  no  other  place  of  worship  than  the  one  taber- 
nacle. It  rather  appears  that  he  sanctioned  the  simple  mode 
of  sacrificing  upon  heights  on  altars  of  earth  or  rough  stone, 
as  once  the  patriarchs  did,  which  custom  was  maintained,  until 
the  heights  gave  way  to  synagogues. 

3.  THE  FEASTS. 

Besides  the  weekly  Sabbath  and  the   new-moon  days,   the 

Mosaic  law  has  prescribed  four  feasts,  the  feast  of  Passover,  of 

Weeks,  and  of  Booths,  and  the  Day  of  Memorial,  and  one  Day 

of  Atonement.     The  first  was  of  seven  days  (from  the  eve  of  the 

12 


178  APPENDIX   TO 

fourteenth  day  of  Nissan  or  the  first  month,  corresponding  to 
April,  to  the  eve  of  the  twenty-first  day  of  that  month)  in 
remembrance  of  the  departure  from  Egypt.  It  should  be  dis- 
tinguished, besides,  by  additional  sacrifices;  by  the  sacrifice  of 
the  passover  lamb  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  Nissan,  and  the 
offering  of  the  first  sheaf,  being  at  the  conclusion  of  the  grain 
harvest,  and  by  eating  unleavened  bread  and  bitter  herbs,  also 
in  remembrance  of  the  departure  from  Egypt.  The  second 
feast  should  be  seven  weeks  after  the  first  day  of  the  passover, 
occuring  the  sixth  day  of  Sivan,  corresponding  to  June,  which 
should  be  distinguished  by  bringing  the  flour-offering  from  the 
new  flour — occuring  at  the  time  when  the  husbandman  was 
done  with  threshing  and  grinding — and  by  other  additional 
sacrifices.  According  to  tradition  this  feast  was  a  memorial 
of  the  glorious  day  of  the  revelation  on  Mount  Sinai.  The 
third  feast  should  take  place  at  the  eve  of  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  seventh  month,  Tishri,  corresponding  with  October,  and 
last  for  seven  days ;  to  be  concluded  on  the  eighth  day  with  a 
feast  of  conclusion.  It  was  distinguished,  besides,  by  the 
additional  offerings,  by  the  commandment  to  dwell  in  booths 
during  the  feast,  in  remembrance  of  the  voyage  through  the 
wilderness,  and  by  preparing  a  festive  wreath  for  every  body, 
consisting  of  a  branch  of  the  palm  tree,  branches  of  the  myrtle 
tree,  willows  of  the  brook,  and  the  fruit  of  the  tree  hadar, 
according  to  tradition  the  citron  tree,  to  rejoice  with  it  before 
the  Lord.  The  symbolical  import  of  that  festive  wreath  can 
not  be  ascertained  at  present.  The  whole  was  intended  to  be  a 
feast  of  ingathering  of  the  vine,  olives,  figs,  pomegranates  and 
other  fruits,  which  was  a  joyous  occasion  among  all  nations  of 
antiquity.  The  Day  of  Memorial,  according  to  tradition  the  com- 
mencement of  the  civil  year,  was  distinguished  by  additional 
sacrifices,  and,  for  astronomical  reasons,  also  by  blowing  a 
musical  instrument  made  of  rams'  horn.  It  was  to  take  place 
the  first  day  of  the  seventh  month.  The  tenth  day  of  that  month 
was  set  apart  for  atonement  of  sins  by  negative  afflictions, 
as  the  tradition  maintained,  such  as  fasting  and  repentance, 
while  the  heathens  inflicted  upon  themselves   positive  punish- 


PERIOD    I.  179 

ments  to  appease  the  gods.  A  peculiarly  solemn  service  dis- 
tinguished that  day,  and  among  the  additional  offerings  was, 
most  remarkably,  the  ram,  upon  which  the  high  priest  confessed 
all  the  sins  of  the  house  of  Israel,  and  being  therefore  thought 
unworthy  to  be  sacrificed  before  the  Lord,  he  was  sent  to  a 
place  in  the  desert  called  Azazel,  which  gave  rise  to  many 
superstitious  theories.* 

It  is  a  commonly  known  fact  that  the  pagans  celebrated 
principally  two  feasts  at  the  times  of  the  equinox,  in  spring 
and  autumn,  besides  the  feasts  in  honor  of  the  different  gods, 
among  which  the  feast  of  Ceres  and  Bacchus,  or  harvest,  was 
the  most  notorious  for  lubric  practices,  as  those  feasts  in  gen- 
eral were  the  days  when  the  wildest  passions  were  incited. 
Moses  left  to  the  Israelites  the  two  feasts  at  the  equinox,  pass- 
over  and  the  day  of  memorial,  the  feast  of  harvest  of  the 
fruits  and  of  the  new  flour;  but  he  surrounded  them  with  a 
sanctifying  nimbus.  For  every  feast  there  were  with  Moses 
two  reasons;  a  historical  one,  which  gave  to  the  feast  a  gloomy 
aspect,  and  an  agricultural  one  that  made  it  a  day  of  rejoicing, 
which  two  reasons  counterbalanced  each  other,  producing  an 
equilibrium  of  joy  and  melancholy.  They  should  gather  and 
rejoice  before  the  Lord,  at  the  place  appointed  by  him  and 
with  the  gifts  bestowed  upon  them  by  the  Lord,  a  part  of 
which  should  be  offered  to  him,  and  another  part  be  given 
to  the  poor,  the  widow,  the  orphan,  the  stranger,  and  the 
Levite;  the  bondman  and  the  servant  should  rejoice  with  their 
master,  and  all  Israel,  rich  and  poor,  master  and  servant, 
officer  and  citizen,  should  be  united  before  the  Lord  in  pious 
and  fraternal  sentiments.  The  feasts  were  not  new,  but  the 
ideas  connected  with  them  were  original,  a  part  of  the  grand 
whole  of  the  Mosaic  legislation.  For  his  sublime  ideas,  Moses 
understood  most  eminently  how  to  make  a  fitting  dress,  as  it 
were,  of  any  land  of  material,  which  he  found  among  the 
nation. 

*  Exodus  xii,  14-20-,  xiii,  2-10 ;  xxiii,  14-19  j  xxxiv,  18-23,  Leviticus 
xvi,  xxiii  •,  Numbers  xxviii,  xxix;  Deuteronomy  xvi. 


J  SO  APPENDIX    TO 

4.  THE  NAZIR. 

In  the  sixth  chapter  of  Numbers  we  read  the  following  pas- 
sage in  regard  to  the  Nazir. 

"And  the  Lord  spake  unto  Moses,  saying:  Speak  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  and  say  unto  them,  When  either  man  or 
woman  shall  separate  themselves  to  vow  a  vow  of  a  Nazarite, 
to  separate  themselves  unto  the  Lord:  He  shall  separate  him- 
self from  wine  and  strong  drink,  and  shall  drink  no  vinegar  of 
wine,  or  vinegar  of  strong  drink,  neither  shall  he  drink  any 
liquor  of  grapes,  nor  eat  moist  grapes  or  dried.  All  the  days 
of  his  separation  shall  he  eat  nothing  that  is  made  of  the  vine 
tree,  from  the  kernels  even  to  the  husk.  All  the  days  of  the 
vow  of  his  separation  .there  shall  no  razor  come  upon  his 
head,  until  the  days  be  fulfilled,  in  the  which  he  separateth 
himself  unto  the  Lord;  he  shall  be  holy,  and  shall  let  the  locks 
of  the  hair  of  his  head  grow.  All  the  days  that  he  separateth 
himself  unto  the  Lord,  he  shall  come  at  no  dead  body.  He 
shall  not  make  himself  unclean  for  his  father,  or  for  his  mother, 
for  his  brother,  or  for  his  sister,  when  they  die;  because  the 
consecration  of  his  God  is  upon  his  head.  All  the  days  of  his 
separation  he  is  holy  unto  the  Lord.  And  if  any  man  die  very 
suddenly  by  him,  and  he  hath  defiled  the  head  of  his  consecra- 
tion; then  he  shall  shave  his  head  in  the  day  of  his  cleansing, 
on  the  seventh  day  shall  he  shave  it.  And  on  the  eighth  day 
he  shall  bring  two  turtles,  or  two  young  pigeons,  to  the  priest, 
to  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation :  And  the 
priest  shall  offer  the  one  for  a  sin  offering,  and  the  other  for  a 
burnt-offering,  and  make  an  atonement  for  him,  for  that  he 
sinned  by  the  dead,  and  shall  hallow  his  head  that  same  day. 
And  he  shall  consecrate  unto  the  Lord  the  days  of  his  separa- 
tion, and  shall  bring  a  lamb  of  the  first  year  for  a  trespass 
offering;  but  the  days  that  were  before  shall  be  lost,  because 
his  separation  was  defiled.  And  this  is  the  law  of  the  Naza- 
rite :  When  the  days  of  his  separation  are  fulfilled,  he  shall 
be  brought  unto  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation : 
And  he  shall  offer  his  offering  unto  the  Lord,  one  he -lamb  of 


PERIOD     I.  181 

the  first  }rcar  without  blemish,  for  a  burnt-offering,  and  one 
ewe-lamb  of  the  hrst  year  without  blemish  for  a  sin-offering, 
and  one  ram  without  blemish  for  peace-offerings.  And  a  basket 
of  unleavened  bread,  cakes  of  fine  flour  mingled  with  oil, 
and  wafers  of  unleavened  bread  anointed  with  oil  and  their 
meat-offering  and  their  drink-offerings.  And  the  priest  shall 
bring  them  before  the  Lord,  and  shall  offer  his  sin-offer- 
ing, and  his  burnt-offering.  And  he  shall  offer  the  ram  for  a 
sacrifice  of  peace-offerings  unto  the  Lord,  with  the  basket  of 
unleavened  bread:  the  priest  shall  offer  also  his  meat-offering, 
and  his  drink-offering.  And  the  Nazarite  shall  shave  the  head 
of  his  separation  at  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  the  congre- 
gation, and  shall  take  the  hair  of  the  head  of  his  separation, 
and  put  it  in  the  tire  which  is  under  the  sacrifice  of  the  peace- 
offerings.  And  the  priest  shall  take  the  sodden  shoulder  of  the 
ram,  and  one  unleavened  cake  out  of  the  basket,  and  one  un- 
leavened wafer,  and  shall  put  them  upon  the  hands  of  the 
Nazarite,  after  the  hair  of  his  separation  is  shaven:  And  the 
priest  shall  wave  them  for  a  wave  -offering  before  the  Lord: 
this  is  holy  for  the  priest,  with  the  wave-breast  and  heave- 
shoulder:  and  after  that  the  Nazarite  may  drink  wine.  This 
is  the  law  of  the  Nazarite  who  hath  vowed,  and  of  his  offering 
unto  the  Lord  for  his  separation,  besides  that  his  hand  shall 
get,  according  to  the  vow  which  he  vowed,  so  he  must  do  after 
the  law  of  his  separation." 

It  appears  to  us  that  this  class  of  religious  enthusiasts  was 
numerous  in  Egypt,  therefore  Moses  had  made  a  law  as  to 
what  they  should  do,  and  from  what  kind  of  food  they  should 
abstain;  as  they  most  likely  afflicted  upon  their  bodies  cruel 
and  lasting  injuries,  and  abstained  from  all  profane  joys  and 
from  the  necessary  articles  of  food. 

They  are  remarkable  to  us,  because  we  will  meet  with  them 
frequently  in  this  history.  It  would  even  appear  to  us  that 
they  were  the  Nethinim,  from  whom  afterwards  the  Esseneans 
sprang,  of  whom  we  shall  be  obliged  to  speak  more  at  length 
in  another  chapter  of  this  work.  It  may  suffice  here  to  ob- 
serve, that  they  were  of  Egyptian  origin,  and  that  Moses, 
when  making  this  law,  designed  to  counteract  the  fantastic  and 


182  APPENDIX    TO 

ascetic  practices  of  Egypt  rather  than  to  sanction  this  institu- 
tion. Still  subsequent  generations  understood  it  in  a  different 
way. 

5.  THE  LAW  CONCERNING  THE  DEAD. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  Pentateuch  ordains,  that  not  only 
he  who  touched  a  dead  animal  shall  be  unclean  (Leviticus  xi), 
but  also  whoever  touched  the  dead  body  of  a  man  was  unclean, 
and  not  permitted  to  enter  the  national  sanctuary  until  he  had 
gone  through  the  ceremony  of  purification.  (Numbers  xix). 
The  priests  were  altogether  prohibited  from  touching  a  dead 
body,  except  one  of  their  next  relatives  (Leviticus  xxi),  and 
the  nazir  was  not  permitted  to  touch  any  dead  body  (Numb. 
vi).  This  law  appears  inconsistent  with  the  general  spirit  of 
the  Pentateuch;  the  elevation  of  man,  to  the  consciousness  of 
his  own  dignity,  is  every  where  in  the  Pentateuch  visibly 
attempted,  and  it  goes  so  far  in  that  respect  as  to  set  man 
directly  after,  and  also  in  direct  connection  with  the  Deity.  It 
attempts  every  where  to  uproot  the  feticism  of  Egypt,  setting 
man  so  high  above  the  animal,  whose  master  he  is  by  the  will 
of  the  creator;  still  in  the  law  above  recited,  man  and  beast 
are  put  on  the  same  level ;  the  dead  bodies  of  both  of  them  are 
impure  and  abominable;  the  very  touch  of  which,  or  even 
abiding  in  their  atmosphere,  makes  a  man  impure,  disqualify- 
ing him  from  entering  the  national  sanctuary.  Some  critics 
have  considered  this  law  as  an  indirect  declaration  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, that  the  human  preponderance  is  not  vested  in  the 
body  of  man,  in  which  respect  he  equals  the  beast  of  the  field,  but 
in  his  soul ;  which  puts  his  remains  on  the  same  level  with  that 
of  the  brute  as  soon  as  the  soul  departs  from  the  body.  How- 
ever correct  this  suggestion  may  be,  it  by  no  means  accounts 
for  the  existence  of  the  law.  We  are  of  opinion  that  there 
were  more  causes  than  one  for  this  law ;  for  it  must  be  borne 
in  mind  that  it  was  given  in  the  wilderness,  where  a  large 
number  of  men  were  encamped  closely  together  under  a  tropi- 
cal sky,  and  consequently  every  possible  precaution  had  to  be 
used  against  contagious  diseases.  Every  physician  will  admit 
that  the  contagious  venom  can  be  inhaled  from  the  exhalations 


PERIOD    I, 


183 


of  a  dead  man  or  animal,  if  such  be  in  the  corpse;  and  that 
the  very  process  of  decomposition  of  animal  matter  may  render 
the  air  unwholesome.  This  law  had  then  the  intention  of  pre- 
venting the  spread  of  contagious  diseases. 

Another  reason  may  be  this ;  it  is  well  known  that  the  car- 
casses of  animals  which  died  a  natural  death  were  considered 
an  abomination  among  all  nations  of  antiquity,  especially 
among  the  Egyptians;  this  is  yet  the  case  to  a  great  extent 
among  modern  nations.  The  flayer  is  even  in  our  days  an 
abominable  man  in  all  countries  of  central  Europe,  and  thou- 
sands of  superstitions  surround  the  houses  of  such  men  in  all 
parts  of  Germany.  No  Egyptian  priest,  with  whom  cleanliness 
was  a  principal  duty,  would,  for  any  price,  have  touched  a 
carcass,  and  if  he  touched  it,  he  certainly  had  to  undergo  the 
same  ceremonial  of  purification  as  the  Pentateuch  prescribes 
(Numbers  xix).  "  Ye  shall  be  unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests," 
was  the  maxim  addressed  to  Israel;  i.  e.,  those  degraded  by 
oppression  and  slavery,  should  be  thus  raised  in  their  own 
estimation,  that  each  of  them  should  stand  as  high  as  a  priest 
whom  they  had  admired  so  much  in  Egypt,  and  venerated  for 
their  high  and  esteemed  position  in  that  country ;  consequently 
none  should  touch  a  carcass  without  undergoing  the  ceremonial 
of  purification.  But  this  law  of  impurity  was  not  extended 
in  Egypt  over  dead  men,  and  it  remains  for  us  to  investigate 
into  its  origin.  Apotheosis  was  one  of  the  greatest  follies  of 
ancient  religions,  and  was  in  its  full  blast  in  Egypt.  Cecrops, 
who  came  to  Attica  from  Egypt  in  the  time  of  Moses,  erected 
the  first  altar  to  Jupiter,  whom  he  called  the  Supreme ;  still  it 
is  certain  that  Jupiter  was  a  man,  who  was  idolized  in  the 
course  of  time,  and  the  people  supposed  so  long  that  Jupiter 
was  a  divine  being,  that  they  instinctively  called  God  Jupiter. 
The  Rev.  Michael  Russell  (View  of  Ancient  and  Modern 
Egypt),  informs  us,  that  "The  preservation  of  the  body  in  an 
entire  and  uncorrupted  state  during  three  thousand  years,  is 
understood  to  have  been  connected  with  the  mythological  tenet 
that  the  spirit  by  which  it  was  originally  occupied  would  return 
to   animate   its   members,   and   to   render  it   once   more  the 


184  APPENDIX    TO 

instrument  of  a  moral  probation  amid  the  ordinary  pursuits  of 
the  human  race.  The  mortal  remains,  even  of  the  greatest 
prince,  would  hardly  have  been  regarded  as  deserving  of  the 
minute  care  and  the  sumptuous  apparatus  which  were  employed 
to  save  them  from  dissolution,  had  not  the  national  faith 
pointed  to  a  renewal  of  existence  after  the  lapse  of  ages,  when 
the  bodily  organs  would  again  become  necessary  to  the  exer- 
cise of  those  faculties  from  which  the  dignity  of  enjoyment  of 
man  are  derived." 

The  belief  in  the  resurrection  of  the  body  was  not  limited  to 
the  ancient  Egyptians;  Zoroaster  likewise  devotes  a  large 
chapter  of  his  Zend-a- Vesta  to  the  resurrection  of  the  body. 
The  consequence  of  this  belief  was,  that  the  remains  of  great 
men  were  covered  by  lofty  pyramids  and  other  large  buildings, 
which  are  notoriously  known  in  Egypt.  The  tombs  gradually 
became  sacred  spots,  so  that  the  sacred  writings  of  the  Egypt- 
ians were  deposited  in  the  tomb  of  Osymandias,  as  Diodorus 
Siculus  informs  us.  Gradually  the  tombs  were  converted  into 
temples;  both  Eusebius  and  Clemens  inform  us,  that  the  first 
temples  were  erected  to  the  honor  of  deceased  persons;  the 
Chinese  even  in  our  days  know  of  no  other  temples  but  the 
ancestral  halls,  which  are  erected  in  memory  of  their  deceased 
ancestors,  and  where  Tien  is  worshiped,  the  Budhists  not 
included.  The  tombs  were  easily  converted  into  temples,  as  a 
sacred  awe  surrounded  the  spot,  which  inclined  the  heart  of  the 
visitor  to  worship  God  in  remembrance  of  the  deceased  resting 
there.  Lucian  informs  us,  that  among  the  most  ancient 
Egyptians  the  temples  were  without  statues.  But  a  bust  of 
the  deceased  was  erected;  a  stone  bearing  an  inscription  in  his 
praise,  which  was  first  read  and  gazed  at  with  amazement; 
finally,  it  was  adored  as  an  idol,  and  the  man  whose  name  the 
temple  bore,  was  idolized  and  made  god  himself. 

The  nations  who  practiced  no  apotheosis  had  for  a  long  time 
no  temples;  such  were  the  Persians,  the  Chinese,  the  Celtic 
Druids  and  the  Goths.  This  degradation  of  the  human  mind 
was  entirely  uprooted  among  Israel  by  the  law,  which  declared 
the  human  body  to  be  an  impure  and  abominable  object,  equal 


PERIOD   I, 


185 


to  the  fallen  beast,  and  he  who  touched  it  must  undergo  the 
ceremonial  of  purification.  The  priests  were  altogether  pro- 
hibited from  touching  the  dead,  except  their  next  relatives,  as 
certainly  the  Egyptian  priests  had  their  hands  in  the  production 
and  maintenance  of  that  superstition;  the  Nazir,  who  is  the 
enthusiast  of  the  Mosaic  law,  such  as  every  nation  has  pro- 
duced, was  entirely  prohibited  from  touching  the  dead ;  for  his 
interference  was  most  dangerous  in  that  respect.  This  law, 
however,  had  its  effect ;  after  the  Israelites  went  astray  after 
the  gods  of  other  nations,  they  never  committed  the  folly  of 
idolizing  a  dead  man;  the  grave  of  Moses  was  hidden,  and 
Elijah  taken,  to  heaven  alive,  in  order  to  prevent  apotheosis. 

XIV.  TAXES  AND  THE  TREASURY. 

Having  reviewed  the  different  institutions  of  the  Mosaic 
law  it  becomes  necessary  to  direct  the  attention  of  the  reader 
to  the  pecuniary  means  by  which  those  institutions  were  sup- 
ported. 

1.  The  priests  should  receive  from  the  people,  besides  the 
parts  due  unto  them  from  the  sacrifices  in  the  tabernacle,  and 
on  the  altars  built  on  heights,  the  therumah,  apart  of  the  grains 
of  every  harvest;  Moses  did  not  say  how  large  a  portion  they 
should  be  given,  but  the  expounders  of  the  law  in  after  ages, 
fixed  it  to  a  fiftieth  part  of  the  harvest:  the  biccurim,  or  first 
fruits  of  the  vine,  olive,  pomegranates,  granates,  figs  and  dates, 
and  the  wool  of  the  lamb,  sheared  the  first  time;  no  law  was 
given  fixing  the  quantity  of  fruits  to  be  given  to  the  priest: 
the  halah,  part  of  the  dough,  most  likely  prepared  to  bake 
cakes  for  festive  occasions:  the  behorim,  or  first-born  of  all 
the  clean  domestic  animals,  if  it  was  a  male  without  blemish; 
the  first-born  of  the  unclean  domestic  animals  should  be 
redeemed,  and  for  every  first  born  male  person,  the  priest 
should  be  paid  five  shekels  of  silver:  the  her  em,  property, 
animals,  or  even  persons  voluntarily  devoted  to  the  Lord, 
which  could  be  redeemed  under  fixed  laws.* 

♦Leviticus  xxvii:  Numbers  xviii. 


186  APPENDIX    TO 

2.  The  Levite  should  be  given  the  tithe  of  all  grains  and  of 
the  increase  of  cattle.  This  custom  was  older  than  Moses ; 
Melchizedek  and  Jacob  made  mention  of  it.  The  Levites  were 
not  only  the  literati,  assistant  priests,  court  constables,  and 
scribes,  but  they  also  formed  the  national  guard;  and,  con- 
sidering that  they  yielded  their  inheritance  of  the  land  to  the 
other  tribes,  this  tax  was  by  no  means  excessive. 

When  the  tithe  was  taken  from  the  produce  of  the  harvest 
for  the  Levite,  a  second  tithe  should  be  taken  which  belonged 
to  the  poor  the  second,  fourth  and  sixth  year  after  the  year  of 
release,  besides  other  gifts  described  before;  the  first,  third 
and  fifth  year  after  the  year  of  release  that  second  tithe  should 
be  spent  to  the  purpose  of  the  three  annual  journe}rs  to  the  place 
which  the  Lord  would  choose;  to  this  purpose  was  also  set 
apart  the  fruit  of  all  trees  from  the  fourth  year  after  it  was 
first  planted ;  the  fruits  of  the  first  three  years  were  prohibited 
altogether.  The  national  sanctuary  itself  should  be  supported 
by  the  free-will  gifts  ;*  by  part  of  the  booty  taken  in  war,  which 
belonged  to  the  Lord  (Numb,  xxxi),  and,  it  would  appear  to  us, 
by  the  herem,  mentioned  above,  which  belonged  to  Aaron  as 
long  as  they  sojourned  in  the  wilderness,  but  afterwards  to  the 
public  treasury.  The  treasury  of  the  national  sanctuary  was 
the  public  treasury  in  every  other  respect,  being  deposited  at 
that  place,  which  was  also  the  place  of  sessions  for  the 
national  council  and  was  guarded  by  the  priests  and  Levites. 
Moses  made  no  provision  for  the  payment  of  salaries  for  civil 
or  military  services,  nor  did  he  mention  a  tax  in  support  of 
the  national  government ;  he  assigned  this  point  to  the  religious 
feelings  of  the  community,  which,  however,  was  fixed  after- 
wards. 

It  is  not  in  our  province  to  comment  on  laws  which  exer- 
cised no  influence  on  the  history  of  the  nation.  We  suppose, 
therefore,  that  we  have  said  enough  on  the  subject  to  give  the 
reader  a  fair  insight  into  the  history  of  this  nation.  It  may 
suffice  to  make  the  following  general  remarks : 

The  laws  of  charity  were   extended  also  over  all  animals. 

*ExodU3  xxv;  xxvii.  20;   xxx,  12. 


PERIOD     I.  187 

The  birds  were  especially  protected  by  the  law;  most  likely  on 
account  of  their  beneficial  influence  on  agriculture.  A  cor- 
ruption of  nature,  the  amalgamation  of  different  kinds  of 
animals,  or  of  vegetable  seeds,  and  the  wearing  of  a  garment 
of  woollen  and  linen  stuff,  was  prohibited  by  the  laws  of  Moses, 
as  well  as  by  Zoroaster  and  others.  Mutilation  of  the  body, 
or  even  making  cuts  in  any  part  of  it,  imprinting  marks,  and 
all  other  practices  of  this  kind  met  frequently  among  savage 
nations  and  also  in  the  worship  rendered  to  different  gods, 
were  strictly  prohibited;  Moses  went  so  far,  in  this  respect,  as 
to  prohibit  the  cutting  of  the  hairs  which  nature  caused  to 
grow.  All  sorts  of  superstitious  practices,  as  enchantments, 
divinations,  witchcraft,  intercourse  with  familiar  spirits,  were 
prohibited  under  the  penalty  of  death.  The  cruel  custom  of 
the  ancient  Pan  worshipers,  seething  a  living  kid  in  the  milk 
of  its  mother,  and  dancing  around  it,  reciting  the  praise  of  the 
god  as  long  as  the  victim  groaned;  together  with  the  savage 
custom  of  drinking  the  blood  of  animals,  gathering  the  rest 
of  it  in  holes  dug  in  the  earth  to  prophesy  at  it,  or  cutting  a 
piece  of  flesh  from  the  body  of  a  living  animal  and  devouring 
it,  were  prohibited  by  Moses.  It  may  be  given  as  a  general 
rule,  that  whatever  was  cruel,  barbarous,  or  superstitious,  dan- 
gerous to  popular  liberties,  to  a  fair  development  of  the  moral 
sentiments  and  mental  capacities  of  man,  was  prohibited  by 
Moses.  His  laws  in  regard  to  warfare  are  by  no  means  an 
exception  to  this  rule,  as  has  been  explained  before.  He  could 
not  at  once  uproot  all  the  institutions,  customs,  and  concep- 
tions which  he  found  among  the  people.  He  opposed  as  much 
as  practicable,  and  laid  a  sure  foundation  for  a  gradual  ter- 
mination of  every  thing  which  was  inconsistent  with  divine 
truth,  with  the  moral  sentiments  of  man  and  with  the  princi- 
ples of  political,  social,  and  religious  liberty. 

XV.  THE  PROPHECIES  OF  MOSES. 
Reviewing  what  has  been  said  on  the  institutions  of  Moses, 
we  will  arrive  at  two  results.     First,  that  these  institutions 
contain  the  verities  which  a  careful  observation  of  nature  and 


188  APPENDIX   TO 

history  represent  to  the  human  mind;  and,  secondly,  that  they 
were  calculated  to  develop  the  moral,  mental  and  physical 
capacities  of  the  nation,  and  to  connect  the  twelve  independent 
tribes  into  one  great  and  peaceable  fraternity.  Moses,  who 
knew  the  human  mind,  could  easily  predict  that  his  institutions 
would  never  be  lost;  that  there  would  be  at  all  ages  men,  who 
have  discarded  superstition  and  corruption,  and  who  would 
comprehend  and  advocate  his  institutions.  He  could  also 
know,  that  if  the  Israelites  would  be  obedient  to  his  laws, 
they  would  be  a  great  and  powerful  nation,  which  could  not 
be  subdued  nor  annihilated ;  for  this  law  intended  to  make  them 
superior  to  the  rest  of  mankind,  as  the  state  of  society  then 
was,  in  mental,  moral  and  physical  strength,  and  to  unite  them 
into  an  inseparable  union.  He  also  knew,  that  the  Israelites 
with  this  law  would  form  a  direct  contrast  to  the  pagan 
nations,  denying  the  divinity  of  their  gods,  living  separated 
from  them,  and  having  come  into  the  land  by  means  of  conquest, 
which  made  the  pagans  their  irreconcilable  enemies.  He  there- 
fore could  tell  them,  that  if  they  would  obey  his  laws  they 
would  be  strong  enough  in  every  respect,  mental,  moral,  and 
physical,  to  maintain  themselves  in  their  country  and  to  chas- 
tise their  enemies,  who  would  gradually  be  convinced  of  the 
truth  which  pervades  his  laws,  and  would  become  their  friends. 
But  if  they  should  neglect  the  law,  immorality  would  enfeeble 
them,  superstition  would  weaken  their  mental  faculties,  the 
foreign  culte  would  disunite  them,  the  neglect  of  the  law  would 
operate  disadvantageously  upon  agriculture  and  industry,  upon 
health  and  life ;  that  this  would  make  them  an  easy  prey  to  their 
enemies,  who  would  easily  succeed  in  driving  them  away  from 
their  country,  and  scatter  them  among  nations  who  would  hate 
them  on  account  of  forming  a  direct  contrast  to  each  of 
them  in  religion,  sentiments,  and  mental  directions.  But 
Moses  also  knew,  that  the  verities  which  he  had  promulgat- 
ed would  never  be  entirely  forgotten,  that  many  would  bear 
them  also  into  the  most  distant  countries,  that  this  would 
always  preserve  in  them  a  national  pride,  and  a  desire  for 
their   first  home,    and  that   they  therefore  would   ultimately 


PERIOD    I.  189 

return  to  their  land,  and  God  would  never  break  his  covenant 
with  them.  "See,  I  have  set  before  thee  this  day,  life  and  the 
good,  death  and  the  evil;  in  that  I  command  thee  this  day  to 
love  the  Lord  thy  God,  to  walk  in  his  ways,  and  to  keep  his 
commandments  and  his  statutes,  and  his  ordinances;  that  thou 
mayest  live  and  multiply,  and  that  the  Lord  thy  God  may  bless 
thee  in  the  land  whither  thou  goest  to  possess  it.  But  if  thy 
heart  turn  away,  so  that  thou  wilt  not  hearken,  and  thou 
sufterest  thyself  to  be  drawn  away,  and  thou  worshipest  other 
gods,  and  servest  them;  I  proclaim  unto  you  this  day,  that  ye 
shall  surely  perish,  you  shall  not  remain  many  days  upon  the 
land,  whither  thou  passest  over  the  Jordan  to  go  thither  to 
possess  it.  I  call  heaven  and  earth  as  witnesses  against  you 
this  day,  that  I  have  set  before  you  life  and  death,  the  blessing 
and  the  curse;  therefore  choose  thou  life,  and  thou  mayest  live, 
both  thou  and  thy  seed"  (Deutr.  xxx,  15-19).  "  And  it  shall 
come  to  pass,  when  all  these  things  are  come  upon  thee,  the 
blessing  and  the  curse,  which  I  have  set  before  thee,  and  thou 
reflectest  in  thy  heart  among  all  the  nations,  whither  the  Lord 
thy  God  has  driven  thee.  So  that  thou  returnest  unto  the  Lord 
thy  God,  and  hearkenest  unto  his  voice  according  to  all  that  I 
command  thee  this  day,  thou  and  thy  children,  with  all  thy 
heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul:  That  then  the  Lord  thy  God  will 
restore  thy  captivity,  and  have  compassion  upon  thee.  And 
he  will  again  gather  thee  from  all  the  nations,  whither  the 
Lord  thy  God  has  scattered  thee.  If  thy  outcasts  be  at  the 
outmost  part  of  heaven,  from  there  will  the  Lord  thy  God 
gather  thee,  and  from  there  will  he  bring  thee.  And  the  Lord 
thy  God  will  bring  thee  into  the  land  which  thy  fathers  pos- 
sessed, and  thou  shalt  possess  it,  and  he  will  do  thee  good,  and 
multiply  thee  above  thy  fathers"  (Deutr.  xxx,  1-5). 

And  here  we  stand,  at  the  distance  of  thirty-four  centuries, 
and  look  back  with  astonishment  upon  the  man  who  stood  as 
high  above  his  own  age  as  Mount  Blanc  over  the  hills ;  whose 
words  have  reached  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  whose  doctrines 
and  principles  have  laid  the  basis  to  civilization,  and  now  for 
the  first  time  pervade  the  civilized  world.     Liberty,  justice  and 


190  APPENDIX    TO 

fraternity  were  his  watch  words,  now  the  nations  re-echo  them; 
mental,  moral  and  physical  strength,  constitute  the  proper  man, 
to  which  superstition,  immorality,  opulence  and  luxury,  are 
the  greatest  enemies ;  wherefore  the  latter  must  be  effectually 
opposed;  only  proper  men  can  make  a  proper  nation.  This  is 
the  doctrine  of  Moses,  which  the  world  now  begins  to  under- 
stand. Still  he  said  it  thirty-four  centuries  ago.  If  he  were 
not  a  prophet,  he  certainly  was  the  greatest  man  of  antiquity. 
If  it  were  not  a  history  that  we  write,  recording  only  what  has 
been  done,  we  would  say  without  fear,  Moses  was  a  prophet, 
and  his  words  are  divine;  and  it  is  extremely  easy  to  justify 
this  idea  by  a  legal  process  of  logical  reasoning. 

XVI.  LITERATURE. 

The  Hebrew  alphabet  is  undoubtedly  one  of  the  most  ancient 
in  the  world;  and  while  the  Egyptians  resorted  for  centuries  to 
hieroglyphics  to  express  their  thoughts,  the  nations  of  the 
south-western  part  of  Asia  were  acquainted  with  letters  and 
alphabetical  writing.  There  was  anciently  a  considerable 
communication  between  Egypt  and  Greece,  and  the  numerous 
Egyptian  emigrants,  nocking  into  Greece,  brought  thither 
Egyptian  civilization,  arts,  agriculture  and  religion.  So  the 
lyre  of  Orpheus  is  but  an  echo  of  the  lyre  of  Hermes.  Still 
the  art  of  alphabetical  writing  was  brought  to  Greece  at  a 
considerably  later  period  by  Cadmus,  who  is  supposed  to 
have  been  a  Phoenician,  perhaps  the  leader  of  a  Phoenician 
colony.  But  be  this  as  it  may,  it  is  undeniable  that  Cadmus, 
is  derived  from  the  Hebrew  kedem,  east,  and  that  the  Greek 
alphabet  has  eastern  names;  consequently,  that  alphabet 
came  from  the  east  and  not  from  Egypt;  which  must  lead 
to  the  inference,  that  the  Egyptians  were  then  unacquainted 
with  the  art  of  alphabetical  writing,  and  there  is  no  his- 
torical evidence  to  the  contrary.  The  time  of  Cadmus's  arrival 
in  Greece  is  generally  set  50 — 80  years  after  the  exode. 
Pliny  informs  us  (Hist.  nat.  1  vii,  c.  56)  that  the  letters  were 
brought  from  Assyria,  which  may  also  be  understood  to  com- 
prehend Babylonia  and  the  Chaldees.  Diodorus  mentions  Syria 
as  the  fatherland  of  the  alphabet  (Diod.  v,  74).     Manetho  when 


PERIOD   I.  191 

speaking  of  the  beginning  of  learning  in  Egypt,  informs  us, 
that  the  second  Hermes  found  in  the  Seriadic  land  the  antedilu- 
vian pillars  with  the  inscriptions  of  the  first  Hermes,  which 
he  had  buried  under  ground.  The  land  of  the  deluge  must 
undoubtedly  be  sought  in  the  south-west  of  Asia;  the  Seriadic 
land,  Syria  and  Assyria,  seem  to  have  been  synonymous  with 
many  of  the  ancient  writers.  We  are,  therefore,  obliged  to 
search  for  the  origin  of  the  alphabet  on  the  banks  of  the  Eu- 
phrates, which  hypothesis  is  also  confirmed  by  the  names  given 
to  letters. 

1.  x  alaph,  Greek  alpha,  which  signifies  in  the  ancient  lan- 
guage of  the  Chaldees  a  ship,  but  in  Hebrew  a  bullock,  which 
was  used  among  the  Hebrews  to  bear  burdens,  as  the  ship  does 
on  the  sea. 

2.  2  beth,  Greek  beta,  is  derived  from  bayith,  a  house,  like 
which  it  looks. 

3.  J  guimel,  Greek  gamma,  a  small  bridge  in  the  ancient 
Aramaic  language,  and  camel  in  Hebrew. 

4.  i  dalith,  Greek  delta,  derived  from  deleth,  a  door,  and 
like  an  open  door  it  looks. 

5.  n  hat,  signifying  "here  it  is." 

These  five  letters  seem  to  have  been  made  from  one  image ; 
one  goes  from  the  ship  to  the  house,  where  he  must  pass  a  small 
bridge  in  order  to  reach  the  shore,  and  then  he  comes  to  the 
door  and  there  he  is  in  the  house. 

6.  1  vov,  a  nail;  its  appearance  is  that  of  a  nail. 

7.  i  sayin,  Greek  sigma,  the  arms,  the  club;  and  thus  it 
seems. 

8.  n  heth,  fire-tongs;  like  which  it  looks. 

9.  £3  teth,  Greek  chi,  the  fist;  the  appearance  of  the  closed 
hand  is  plainly  indicated. 

10.  <  yud,  Greek  iota,  the  handle  of  a  pan  or  vessel,  like 
which  it  looks. 

11.  D  kaph,  Greek  kappa,  a  plate. 

These  letters  seemed  to  have  been  formed  on  this  image: 
after  the  man  is  in  the  house,  he  goes  to  the  nail  on  which  he 


192  APPENDIX    TO 

hangs  his  arms  or  club,  then  he  take  the  tongues  with  his  fist, 
and  lays  hold  on  the  handle  of  the  pan,  to  take  his  meal. 

12.  S  lamed,  Greek  lambda,  the  cane  or  switch. 

13.  D  mem,  Greek  mu,  from  mayim,  the  water. 

14.  j  tttm.  Greek  nu,  the  fish.     Aram. 

15.  d  samech,  Greek  sigma,  thick. 

16.  p  ayin,  the  eye. 

17.  3  peh,  Greek  pi  and  phi,  the  mouth. 

18.  y  tsadi,  Greek  zeta,  the  fish  angle. 

19.  p  &«/*,  Greek  kappa,  the  hole  of  the  ear. 

20.  i  resh,  Greek  rho,  from  rosh,  the  head. 

21.  w  shin,  from  shen,  the  tooth. 

22.  n  thof,  Greek  theta,  a  mark. 

The  primary  signification  of  these  eleven  letters  may  be  thus 
rendered: 

The  fisher  takes  his  cane  or  switch,  goes  to  the  water  to 
catch  Jish,  and  he  catches  a  thick  or  a  big  one,  through  the  eye 
or  through  the  mouth,  with  the  angle,  or  through  the  ear-hole, 
which  are  on  the  head  in  which  the  teeth  are  a  ma?'&  of  genera.* 
This  shows,  that  the  alphabet  of  the  Hebrews  was  composed 
on  the  banks  of  a  river,  where  ships  arrived  and  where  fishing 
was  a  common  employment,  and  where  both  the  Aramaic  and 
Hebrew  languages  were  known;  for  some  letters  have  a  Hebrew 
and  some  an  Aramaic  name.  But  as  these  two  languages, 
together  with  the  Arabic  and  Syriac  were  anciently  but  one ; 
in  which  age  the  cities  of  Babel,  or  Nineveh,  were  the  most 
flourishing  places,  where  ships  and  fishing  were  common 
enough;  and  in  addition  to  this,  the  classical  testimony  which 
we  adduced  before,  no  doubt  can  be  entertained,  but  that 
Babel,  or  Nineveh,  is  the  place  where  the  Hebrew,  and  conse- 
quently also  the  Arabic,  Syriac,  Chaldean,  Greek  alphabet  was 
composed.  The  time  of  this  composition  must  have  been  at 
a  time  when  the  Aramaic  and  Hebrew  languages  were  still  but 
one  language;  consequently,  before  the  time  of  Jacob's  return 
from  Laban ;  for  then  those  two  languages  already  differed  from 
each  other,  so  that  Jacob  called  the  heap  of  stones  Galed,  the 

*  Vide  Rapop.  Erech  Milin,  art.  din. 


PERIOD    I.  193 

heap  of  witness,  which  Laban  called  Yegar  Sahadutho,  denot- 
ing the  same.  Still  it  is  certain  that  the  Israelites  in  Egypt 
could  not  write;  for  had  they  known  this  art,  the  Egyptians 
would  have  learned  it  of  them,  which  however,  they  did  not. 
Moses  traveled  through  Palestine  and  the  adjacent  countries,  as 
his  accurate  knowledge  of  those  countries  testifies ;  he  was  at 
the  other  side  of  the  Euphrates,  for  also  of  that  region  he  gives 
geographical  and  historical  descriptions ;  he  coincides  precisely 
with  the  Babylonian  historian,  Berosus,  in  the  history  of  the 
deluge,  and  in  other  points;*  he  also  coincides  with  the  Vedas 
in  this  respect;!  he  speaks  of  the  same  giants,  of  which  those 
mythologies  speak.  Moses  was  in  Babylon,  and  read  the  records 
of  the  Chaldecs.  after  he  had  learned  of  them  the  art  of  writing; 
he  shows  this  for  the  first  time  to  the  Israelites  when  bring- 
ing the  two -tables  of  the  covenant,  and  so  they  exclaim,  "And 
the  writing  is  a  writing  of  God  (no  hieroglyphics)  engraved  on 
the  tables."  This  investigation  was  necessary  in  order  to 
meet  the  objection  that  Moses  could  not  have  written  the 
Pentateuch,  because  the  invention  of  the  alphabet  belongs  to 
a  later  age. 

That  Moses  is  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch  is  evident : 

1.  From  the  style  in  which  it  is  written,  to  which  none  of 
the  later  writers  can  lay  a  claim ;  and  the  productions  of  Ezra 
and  his  contemporaries  can  the  least  stand  a  comparison  with 
the  language  of  the  Pentateuch. 

2.  None  of  the  ancient  writers  asserted  that  Moses  was  not 
the  author  of  the  Pentateuch,  while  there  are  traces  of  the 
Pentateuch  in  all  the  canonical  and  apocryphal  books,  as  we 
shall  notice  hereafter,  and  as  Hengstenberg  has  sufficiently 
proved.J 

3.  The  testimony  of  Manetho,  who,  notwithstanding  his 
profound  ignorance  of  the  particulars  of  the  early  history  of 
the  Israelites,  still  testifies,  that  their  redeemer,  Moses,  gave 

*  Josephus  against  Apion,  i,  19. 
fSirWm.  Jones's  Works,  vol.  ii,  p.  240. 

t  Dissertations  on  the  Genuineness  of  the  Pentateuch.  Edinburgh,  1S47. 
13 


194  APPENDIX    TO 

them  laws  and  regulations,  which  were  averse  to  Egyptian 
superstition,  in  teaching  to  believe  in  and  to  worship  but  one 
God. 

4.  Many  of  the  laws  contained  in  the  Pentateuch  were  di- 
rected, as  we  have  frequently  observed,  against  Egyptian 
superstitions;  while  others  were  evidently  accommodated  to  the 
conceptions  of  a  people  just  coming  from  Egypt,  imbued  with 
Egyptian  notions. 

5.  The  author  of  the  Pentateuch,  who  manifests  an  intimate 
acquaintance  with  the  geography,  history,  and  moral  and  phy- 
sical state  of  Canaan  and  the  adjacent  countries,  frequently 
refers  to  Egypt  for  illustrations;  as,  speaking  of  Sedom,  &c, 
he  remarks  that  it  was  "as  a  garden  of  the  Lord,  as  the  land 
of  Egypt  when  thou  comest  towards  Zoar"  (Genesis  xiii,  10); 
and  when  speaking  of  Hebron,  he  says,  "And  Hebron  was 
built  seven  years  before  Zoar  of  Egypt"  (Numb,  xiii,  22),  in 
regard  to  which  country  he  manifests  the  most  intimate  know- 
ledge of  its  geography,  history,  laws,  and  superstitions. 

It  is  therefore  evident,  that  either  Moses  wrote  his  own 
words,  or  one  of  his  contemporaries  did  it  for  him.  But  we 
believe  that  no  one  can  accept  the  latter  alternative.  It  would 
be  entirely  superfluous  for  us  to  prove  that  Genesis  was  written 
by  Moses.  We  have  shown  plainly  enough,  that  without  the 
book  of  Genesis  no  historical  account  can  be  given  for  the  laws, 
religion,  and  actions  of  Moses.  Those  who  say  that  Genesis 
was  written  ages  after  Moses,  have  no  historical  source  to 
account  for  the  appearance  of  Moses.  Though  it  must  be 
admitted,  that  there  are  some  traces  of  later  writers  in  the 
Pentateuch;  yet,  they  are  so  few  in  number,  that  they  can  not 
counterbalance  our  evidences  in  regard  to  the  whole  book, 
and  must  therefore  be  ascribed  to  those  who  compiled  the  canon 
and  to  later  copyists,  who  confounded  glossary  notes  with  the 
original  text.  "And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Moses  had  made 
an  end  of  writing  the  words  of  this  law  in  a  book  until  they 
were  finished;  that  Moses  commanded  the  Levites,  the  bearers 
of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  saying:  '  Take  this 
book  of  the  law,  and  put  it  at  the  side  of  the  ark  of  the  cove- 


PERIOD    I.  195 

riant  of  the  Lord  your  God,  that  it  may  remain  there  against 
thee  for  a  witness  '  "  (Deutr.  xwi,  24-26). 

The  Sepher  ha-Berith,  book  of  the  covenant,  of  which  mention 
is  made,  Exodus,  xxiv.  7,  was,  as  Are  have  said  before,  Genesis, 
together  with  an  extract  from  the  history  of  the  exode,  where- 
fore it  can  not  be  regarded  as  a  separate  book.  But  the 
Sepher  Milchamoth  Jehovah,  book  of  the  wars  of  the  Lord, 
which  is  mentioned  in  Numbers  xxi,  14,  and  of  which  a  quota- 
tion occurs  there  of  seven  verses,  in  proof  that  Arnon  is  on 
the  boundary  between  Moab  and  Amori,  must  have  been  a 
book  written  at  the  time  of  Moses,  which  has  not  reached  us. 
This,  as  well  as  other  books,  we  will  notice  hereafter.  This  is 
probably  the  same  book  of  which  mention  is  made  (Exodus 
xvii,  14)  that  Moses  should  record  in  it  the  enmity  of  Amalek; 
being  there  spoken  of  as  a  certain  well  known  book,  as  the 
patah  under  the  beth  and  the  dagash  forte  in  the  samah  of 
13D3  plainly  indicate.  It  has  been  contended  that  the  book  of 
Job  was  written  in  this  period,  and  some  of  the  ancient  writers 
even  supposed  Moses  to  have  been  the  author  of  that  book 
(Baha  Bathra,  14,  b.).  But  this  hypothesis  can  not  be  sup- 
ported by  any  kind  of  evidence.  The  poetical  form  of  the 
book,  the  metaphysical  speculations  in  which  it  abounds,  and 
the  correct  views  of  Providence  contained  in  it,  invariably 
testify  that  this  book  was  not  written  before  the  return  from 
the  Babylonian  captivity,  to  the  metaphysical  science  of  which 
age  it  best  corresponds.  It  appears  that  the  art  of  writing 
was  taught  to  all  the  Israelites  in  the  desert,  as  Moses  com- 
manded them:  "And  thou  shalt  write  them  upon  the  door 
posts  of  thy  house  and  on  thy  gates."  He  commanded  the 
king  to  write  a  copy  of  the  law  (Deutr.  xvii,  18).  He  com- 
manded them  to  write  the  law  upon  stones  when  they  had 
passed  the  Jordan  (Deutr.  xxvii,  3,  8).  And  he  also  com- 
manded them  to  write  down  his  last  song  (Deutr.  xxxi,  19). 

XVII.  MECHANICAL  ARTS. 
The    Israelites  of  that   period  were  acquainted  with  many 
branches  of  mechanical  art.     The  making  of  the  golden  calf, 
of  the  brass   serpent,    of  the  golden  candlestick,  the  ark,  the 


196  APPENDIX    TO    PERIOD    I. 

golden  table,  the  altar,  and  other  utensils  of  the  tabernacle ; 
the  nails,  the  pillars  covered  with  metal,  show  that  they  un- 
derstood how  to  work  metals  in  different  ways,  and  to  carve 
and  cut  wood  into  different  figures.  The  prohibition  {Exodus 
xx,  25)  not  to  build  an  altar  of  cut  stones,  shows  that  they 
were  acquainted  with  that  art,  as  also  show  the  two  tables  of 
stone  on  which  the  ten  commandments  were  engraved.  The 
garments  of  the  high  priest  as  Moses  ordered  them  to  be  made, 
prove  that  they  were  acquainted  with  the  art  of  polishing, 
setting  and  engraving  jewels.  The  curtains  used  in  the  ta- 
bernacle into  which  different  figures  were  woven,  show  their 
acquaintance  with  spinning,  artificial  weaving,  and  dyeing, 
especially  of  woolen  and  linen  stuffs,  in  purple  red,  purple 
blue,  and  scarlet;  and  the  skins  used  in  the  same  building 
show  us  their  knowledge  of  tanning  and  currying.  The  pre- 
paration of  the  incense  and  the  oil  of  anointment  and  the 
grinding  of  the  golden  calf,  evince  their  acquaintance  with 
some  chemical  processes.  It  may  be  seen,  in  the  words  of 
Moses  (Deutr.  viii,  9,  13),  that  the  Israelites  were  sufficiently 
aware  of  the  value  of  metals,  that  they  understood  the  art  of 
mining,  and  knew  how  to  build  "  good  houses."  It  is  certainly 
unfair  in  many  of  our  modern  admirers  of  ancient  Egypt  to 
assert,  that  all  those  arts  were  learned  in  Egypt,  which  they 
make  the  birthplace  of  all  useful  arts.  It  is  especially  men- 
tioned in  our  records,  that  Eleaser,  the  servant  of  Abraham, 
gave  to  Rebecca  golden  ear  rings  and  bracelets,  and  to  her 
relatives  he  gave  jewels  of  silver  and  jewels  of  gold  (Genesis 
xxiv,  22,  53);  that  Isaac  tilled  the  ground  (ibid,  xxvi,  12); 
that  Esau  had  a  quiver,  bow  and  arrow  (ibid,  xxvii,  3);  that 
Jabob  dreamed  of  a  ladder,  consequently  this  instrument  must 
have  existed  (ibid,  xxvii,  12);  that  Jacob  built  a  house  (ibid, 
xxxiii,  17);  that  Jehudah  had  a  signet,  scarf,  and  staff,  which 
must  have  been  of  a  particular  value  (ibid,  xxxviii,  18);  that 
frequent  mention  is  made  of  money,  and  of  luxurious  gar- 
ments, all  of  which  evidently  indicate  an  advanced  state  of 
civilization  among  the  patriarchs,  and  of  the  knowledge  of 
some  mechanical  arts. 


PERIOD    II 


FROM  THE  ACCESSION  OF  JOSHUA  TO  THE  CHIEF 
COMMAND  TO  THE  END  OF  THE  REPUBLIC  IN 
THE  TIME  OF  SAMUEL.  (2315—2680,  A.  M.  1445— 
1080,  B.  C.) 

BIBLICAL    CHRONOLOGY. 

Joshua's  administration, 25  years  (Antiqu.  vi,  1-29). 

Othniel's, 40  years  (Judges  iii,  11). 

Ehud1s'        I 80  years  (Judges  iii,  30-31). 

Shamgar's,  > 

Deborah  and  Barak's, 40  years  (ibid  v,  31). 

Gideon's,    40  years  (ibid  viii,  28). ' 

Thola's, 23  years  (ibid  x,  2). 

Jair,   22  years  (ibid  x,  3). 

Ebzon,   7  years  (ibid  xii,  9). 

Elan, 10  years  (ibid  xii,  10). 

Abdan, 8  years  (ibid  xii,  14).; 

Samson, 20  years  (ibid  xv,  20). 

Eli, 40  years  (I  Samuel  iv,  IS). 

Samuel,    12  years  (Antiqu.  vi,  xiii,  5),*  be- 
fore Saul,  and  8  years  with  Saul. 

Total  amount  of  years,         367 

Considering  the  inaccuracy  of  the -last  year  of  each  judge 
(which  might  have  been  taken  in  full,  although  governing  but 
a  part  of  the  year),  it  will  not  be  much  amiss  to  reduce  the 
period  of  the  republic  to  the  round  number  of  365  years,*  we 
are  supposed  to  be  entitled  to  the  belief  that  Abimelech  was  a 
contemporary  of  Thola,  and  Jephtah  was  a  contemporary  of 
Abdon. 

*  Vide  Appendix  to  Period  II.     The  Government. 


198  PERIOD    II. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

ADMINISTRATION  OF  JOSHUA.     (1115—1120,  B.  C.) 

After  the  thirty  days  of  national  mourning  for  Moses  were 
ended  and  Joshua  had  promised,  most  likely  under  oath,  to 
administer  the  laws,  and  to  lead  the  people  in  the  war  which 
they  were  about  undertaking,  precisely  as  written  in  the  laws 
of  Moses,  from  which  he  would  not  depart  "neither  to  the 
right  nor  to  the  left"  {Joshua  i,  7),  the  members  of  the  senate, 
before  whom  this  promise  was  given,  returned  to  their  respect- 
ive tribes  announcing  to  them  the  orders  of  Joshua,  to  prepare 
for  crossing  the  Jordan  to  begin  the  war  with  the  aborigines, 
which  preparation  should  be  accomplished  within  three  days. 
The  heads  of  the  tribes  of  Reuben,  Gad,  and  of  the  half  of 
the  tribe  of  Menassah  charged  their  men  to  remember  the 
promise  given  to  Moses,  to  go  armed  before  their  brethren  until 
they  had  taken  possession  of  the  land,  which  the  Lord  had 
promised  to  them,  after  which  they  might  return  to  their  pos- 
sessions east  of  the  Jordan. 

When  the  people  were  thus  informed  that  Joshua  had 
promised  to  govern  and  to  lead  them  as  the  laws  of  Moses  bid 
him  do;  they  did  not  only  take  willingly  the  oath  of  allegiance, 
but  gave  him  also  full  military  powers  during  the  time  that  the 
war  lasted  (ibid  i,  18).  The  first  step  of  Joshua  was  to  dis- 
patch secretly  two  spies  to  bring  him  an  account  of  the  strongly 
fortified  Jericho  and  the  adjacent  country,  as  he  had  not  that 
minute  knowledge  of  the  country  that  Moses  had.  The  spies 
crossed  the  Jordan,  and  acquainted  themselves  with  the  state 
of  the  Canaanites.  "They  took  a  full  view  of  the  city  of 
Jericho  without  disturbance,  and  beheld  the  parts  of  the  walls 
which  were  strong,  also  those  which  were  insecure,  as  well  as 
the  gates  which  were  so  weak  as  might  afford  an  entrance  to 
their  army.  All  this  they  effected  without  attracting  the  notice 
of  the  people  of  the  city."*  At  evening  they  retired  to  an  inn, 
which  was  within  and   near   the  wall   of  the   city,  and  which 

*  Joseph.  Antiq.  b.  v.  c.  1,  2. 


CHAPTER    IV.  199 

was  kept  by  a  woman  whose  name  was  Rahab.  When  they 
were  there,  the  king  of  the  city  was  informed  of  their  presence 
in  the  inn  of  Rahab,  and  men  were  sent  accordingly  to  arrest 
them.  Rahab,  however,  who  had  concealed  the  spies  upon  the 
roof  under  stalks  of  flax,  informed  the  king's  messengers,  that 
the  men  whom  they  wanted  had  left  the  city  before  the  gates 
were  locked;  upon  which  the  men  of  Jericho  went  in  pursuit 
of  the  spies,  going  as  far  as  the  fords  of  the  Jordan.  Mean- 
while Rahab  went  up  to  the  spies,  and  after  having  told  them 
how  the  tidings  of  their  passage  through  the  Red  sea  and  of 
their  victorious  wars  against  Sihon  and  Og  had  discouraged 
her  countrymen,  and  convinced  her  that  the  Lord  their  God 
is  the  only  Lord  in  heaven  above  and  on  earth  beneath,  she 
urged  upon  them  to  promise  under  oath  that  they  would  save 
her  and  her  father's  house,  because  she  had  saved  them  from 
certain  death.  The  spies  granted  her  request  on  condition  that 
she  kept  secret  their  plans  concerning  the  city,  that  all  her 
relatives  remain  in  her  house,  and  after  she  had  let  them  down 
by  a  court  through  her  window  over  the  wall,  they  added  yet 
these  conditions,  that  a  scarlet  cord  be  bound  at  this  window, 
so  that  they  might  be  enabled  to  ascertain  the  house. 
The  spies  then  retired  as  Rahab  had  advised  them,  to  the 
mountain,  where  they  waited  three  days  until  those  pursuing 
them  from  Jericho  had  returned,  after  which  they  returned  to 
the  camp.  The  morning  of  the  next  day  was  appointed  to 
break  up  the  camp.  The  people  of  the  tribes  who  were  to  take 
possession  of  the  land  west  of  the  Jordan,  together  with  forty 
thousand  warriors  of  those  who  were  to  remain  east  of  it, 
marched  towards  that  river.  Having  reached  the  banks  of  it, 
they  were  afraid  to  cross,  because  the  current  was  very  strong, 
and  they  were  not  aware  of  the  ford  where  the  spies  must  have 
crossed,  and  to  which  point  the  pursuers  of  Jericho  went,  as 
the  point  where  they  could  pass  the  river.  Joshua  therefore 
commanded  the  priests  to  go  before  them,  in  order  to  encourage 
the  people,  which  they  did,  after  which  the  multitude  followed 
according  to  their  tribes,  having  their  children  and  their  wives 
in  the   midst  of  them,  being  fearful  lest  they  should  be  borne 


200  PERIOD    II. 

away  by  the  stream.  But  as  soon  as  the  priests  had  entered 
the  river,  it  appeared  fordable,  the  depth  of  water  being  re- 
strained and  the  sand  appearing  at  the  bottom;  for  the  current 
was  neither  so  strong  nor  so  swift  as  to  carr}>-  it  away  by  its 
force,  so  they  all  passed  over  the  river  without  fear,  while  the 
priests  were  standing  amidst  the  water.*  Twelve  stones  were 
taken  from  the  bottom  of  the  Jordan  by  the  twelve  heads  of 
the  tribes,  and  when  arrived  at  the  place  of  encampment, 
which  Josephus  states  was  fifty  furlongs  from  the  Jordan  and 
ten  from  Jericho,  an  altar  was  built  of  those  stones  as  a  memo- 
rial of  the  day  when  Israel  passed  the  Jordan.  While 
encamped  there,  Joshua  ordered  that  all  those  born  in  the 
wilderness  should  be  circumcised,  as  those  who  came  from 
Egypt  had  been  circumcised  there,  but  those  born  in  the 
wilderness  were  not.  If  all  the  people  coming  from  Egypt 
as  being  above  twenty  years  of  age  had  died  in  the  wilderness, 
then  about  two-thirds  of  the  whole  army  had  to  undergo  that 
operation,  and  it  would  certainly  have  been  very  imprudent  in 
Joshua  to  expose  himself  to  the  enemy,  in  whose  land  he  now 
was,  by  making  two- thirds  of  his  army  unable  for  many  days 
to  protect  themselves.  The  example  of  the  city  of  Shechem 
should  have  served  to  caution  him.  It  would  appear  to  us, 
that  not  all  the  men  coming  from  Egypt  and  being  then  above 
twenty  years  of  age  died  in  the  wilderness ;  this  lot  befell  but 
one  class  of  the  people,  which  the  Bible  calls  "  men  of  war," 
and  it  also  states  more  than  once  "  for  forty  years  the  children 
of  Israel  went  through  the  wilderness  until  there  was  spent 
the  whole  nation,  the  men  of  icar"  {Joshua  v,  6).  "And  the 
days  which  we  went  from  Kadesh  Barnea  until  we  passed  the 
creek  of  Zared,  were  thirty-eight  years,  until  there  was  spent 
all  the  generation,  the  men  of  war,  from  the  midst  of  the  camp 
as  the  Lord  had  sworn  concerning  them."  "  And  it  came  to 
pass  when  there  were  spent  all  the  men  of  war  dying  from  the 
midst  of  the  people"  (Deut.  ii,  14-16).  According  to  these  three 
verses  the  men  of  war  died  from  the  midst  of  the  people; 

*  Antiqu.  v,  1-3;  Judges  xii,  5;  II  Samuel  xvii,  22-24;  xix,    16,  17-19- 
39;  I  Chron.  xii,  15;  I  Maccab.  v,  52;  Robinson  and  Smith  ii,  503. 


CHAPTER    IV.  201 

because,  as  we  arc  informed  (Numb,  xiv)  they  refused  to  follow 
Moses  to  take  possession  of  the  kind. 

It  can  not  be  supposed  for  a  moment,  that  all  the  men  coming 
from  Egypt  were  warriors,  since  the  institutions  of  Egypt 
knew  but  of  one  caste  of  warriors,  into  which  certainly  only  a 
small  number  of  the  Israelites  was  admitted,  who  afterwards 
assisted  Moses  when  taking  Raamses,  when  lighting  against 
Amalek,  and  on  other  occasions.  Those  men  composed  his 
principal  force,  and  they  refused  to  make  war  upon  the 
Canaanites,  and  died  in  the  wilderness.  It  can  not  be  said, 
that  scores  of  other  men  did  not  die  of  the  many  pestilences, 
recorded  in  the  Pentateuch,  or  a  natural  death  during  a  period 
of  forty  years ;  still,  the  especial  notice  of  the  extinction  of  that 
whole  generation  appear  to  allude  but  to  the  men  of  war.  If 
Moses  had  at  his  command  six  hundred  thousand  warriors,  he 
could  have  conquered  not  only  Palestine,  but  the  whole  of 
Asia,  not  only  as  it  was  then,  but  also  as  it  is  now  situated. 
Besides  this,  it  must  be  remarked,  that  when  the  first  census 
was  taken,  the  second  year  after  the  exode,  the  number  of  men 
above  twenty  was  six  hundred  and  three  thousand  five  hundred 
and  fifty  (Numb,  i,  45);  but  when  the  second  census  was  taken, 
at  the  end  of  their  travel  in  the  wilderness,  after  twenty-four 
thousand  had  died  in  the  last  pestilence,  noticed  in  the  Penta- 
teuch (Numb,  xxv,  9),  there  were  men  above  twenty  years,  six 
hundred  and  one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  thirty,  which 
together  with  the  twenty-four  thousand  mentioned  before,  would 
give  a  surplus  above  the  number  of  the  first  census  of  twenty- 
two  thousand  one  hundred  and  eighty,  which  seems  to  be  a 
matter  of  impossibility  if  all  men  above  twenty  died  within 
that  time,  and  the  unfavorable  climate,  the  sudden  change  of 
occupation  and  other  unfavorable  influences  are  duly  calculated. 
The  Levites  give  the  best  proof  to  this  effect;  at  the  first  cen- 
sus there  were  Levites  above  one  month  thirty-two  thousand 
{Numb,  iii,  39);  at  the  second  census  were  Levites  above  one 
month  twenty-three  thousand  (Numb,  xxvi,  62),  although  the 
Levites,  always  obedient  to  the  law,  could  not  be  included  in 
the  punishment  which  befell  the  disobedient  (vide  Deutr.  xxxiii. 


202  PERIOD*  II. 

8-11).  Eleascr  became  high  priest  after  Aaron,  who  was  surely 
above  twenty  years  of  age  when  the  exode  took  place.  The 
circumcision  was  performed  on  those  born  in  the  desert,  and  in 
commemoration  of  it,  the  place  was  called  Gilgal,  on  account 
of  rolling  off  the  reproach  of  Egypt ;  but  Joscphus  defining  the 
term  to  denote  liberty,  knows  nothing  of  the  circumcision  to 
have  been  performed  in  that  place,  he  knows  but  of  sacrifices 
brought  there.  It  appears,  however,  that  a  circumcision  must 
have  taken  place,  for  but  a  few  days  after  this  the  passah  feast 
was  celebrated  there,  as  it  is  recorded  in  both  our  sources,  of 
the  flesh  of  which  none  but  the  circumcised  could  partake  {Ex. 
xii,  43-50).  The  first  day  of  the  passover  feast  was  also  the 
first  day  when  no  manna  fell,  and  they  ate  of  the  fruit  of  the 
land. 

Jericho,  a  fortified  city,  and  the  key  to  that  rich  plain  which 
once  the  patriarchs  possessed,  had  to  be  reduced  before  they 
could  advance  into  the  interior.  No  peace  was  accepted  by  the 
inhabitants  of  Jericho,  which  was  locked  up  and  prepared  for 
defence.  Joshua  therefore  besieged  it.  During  the  seven  days 
of  passover,  the  processions  marched  around  the  city;  an  ad- 
vanced guard  was  followed  by  the  priests,  who  bore  the  ark 
and  blew  the  seven  trumpets,  by  the  members  of  the  senate, 
and  a  rear  guard.  These  processions  were  undoubtedly  intended 
to  withdraw  the  attention  of  the  besieged  from  the  undermining 
works  which  they  were  about  constructing.  On  the  seventh 
day  of  the  feast,  the  procession  marched  seven  times  around 
the  city,  which  probably  was  done  in  order  to  overcome  the 
apprehensions  of  the  besieged,  who  might  have  anticipated  an 
assault  that  day.  But,  suddenly,  the  walls  burst,  parts  of  them 
sunk  into  the  subterranean  works,  through  the  breaches  of 
which  the  warriors  stormed  into  the  city  with  warlike  shouts, 
to  which  the  signal  had  been  given  by  the  trumpets  of  the 
priests ;  the  attack  seems  to  have  been  a  sudden  and  unexpected 
one ;  the  conflict  was  short  and  bloody,  and  those  who  did  not 
flee  fell  beneath  the  swords  of  the  assailants ;  so  as  to  have  no 
enemy  in  the  rear  of  the  advancing  army.  Rahab,  the  inn- 
keeper, and  her  family  were  spared;    and,  according  to  a  tra- 


CHAPTER    IV.  203 

diton,  Joshua  married  her.  The  spoil  of  the  city  was  devoted 
to  the  national  treasury;  the  fortifications  were  reduced,  and  a 
curse  pronounced  against  him  who  should  rebuild  them;  because 
it  would  have  been  an  obstacle  in  the  way  between  the  Israelites 
east  and  west  of  the  Jordan.  It  is  cei  tain,  that  the  city  itself 
was  not  reduced,  it  is  mentioned  several  limes  in  the  nexi. 
period  of  history;*  it  was  again  fortified  in  a  later  time  (I  Kings 
xvi,  34). 

Ai  was  the  next  fortified  place  which  offered  resistance,  of 
which  the  spies  sent  there  brought  an  account  that  two  or  three 
thousand  men  would  suffice  to  take  that  city.  Accordingly, 
Joshua  dispatched  about  three  thousand  on  that  expedition; 
but  the  consequences  proved  that  the  spies  had  underrated  the 
valor  of  the  inhabitants  of  that  city,  for  the  Israelites  were 
defeated  and  retired  with  a  loss  of  about  thirty-six  men.  This 
defeat  was  fraught  with  ill  omens,  the  enemy  were  encouraged, 
the  Israelites  disheartened,  and  Joshua  apprehended  that 
despair  of  the  warriors  might  crush  his  entire  plan.  The  defeat 
was  not  ascribed  to  its  natural  causes,  but  to  a  grievous  sin 
which  must  have  been  committed  in  the  camp.  Joshua,  laying 
hold  upon  this  favorable  rumor,  held  review  in  his  army  with 
the  intention  of  discovering  the  transgressor;  in  which  he  well 
succeeded.  A  field  camp  as  large  as  that,  will  scarcely  be 
without  one  or  more  transgressors.  One  Ahan,  son  of  Carmi, 
of  the  tribe  of  Jehudah,  supposing  himself  the  cause  of  that 
misfortune,  confessed  to  have  stolen  of  the  spoil  of  Jericho, 
belonging  to  the  public  treasury,  "a  goodly  Babylonish  gar- 
ment, and  two  hundred  shekels  of  silver,  and  a  wedge  of  gold 
of  fifty  shekels  weight."  This  was  a  violation  of  the  command, 
which,  even  in  our  days,  a  military  commander  may  punish 
with  death;  and,  as  then  circumstances  especially  demanded 
such  a  sacrifice,  Ahan  was  condemned  to  death,  and  was  exe- 
cuted in  a  place  called,  on  that  account,  Emek  Achor,  valley 
of  affliction. 

It  has  been  asked,   and  with  no  small   degree  of  justice :   if 

*  Judges- iii,  13-,  II  Samuel  x,  5. 


204  PERIOD    II. 

Joshua  had  under  his  command  above  six  hundred  thousand 
warriors  (as  he  must  have  had  according  to  the  statement  in 
Numbers  xxvi),  was  not  the  consternation,  which  the  death  of 
thirty-six  out  of  three  thousand  warriors  caused  in  the  camp, 
a  token  of  cowardice,  and  whether  it  can  be  justly  supposed 
that  men,  who  were  so  long  trained  in  the  desert,  and  who  a 
short  time  before  had  so  victoriously  overrun  the  provinces 
east  of  the  Jordan,  should  now  all  at  once  have  become  such 
cowards?  It  appears  to  us,  that  many  of  the  Israelites  re- 
mained on  the  other  side  of  Jordan  and  in  the  desert,  some  of 
them  emigrated  to  Palestine  proper  at  a  later  date,  and  some 
of  them  continued  to  occupy  the  desert  for  a  very  long  time. 
The  tribes  east  of  the  Jordan  had  promised  Moses,  that  all  of 
them  would  go  armed  before  their  brethren  across  the  Jordan, 
still  only  about  40,000  of  them  joined  the  army,  which  was 
even  considered  a  large  number  (Joshua  iv,  12,  13).  It  appears 
to  us,  that  they  sent  warriors  in  proportion  to  the  other 
tribes.  The  number  of  warriors  of  these  two  tribes  and  a 
half  was  above  110,000  (Numbers  xxiv,  7,  18,  34),  and  adopt- 
ing this  proportion  110,000:  40,000=600,000,  it  will  be  found 
that  the  army  of  Joshua  consisted  of  218,181  warriors,  which 
was  by  no  means  too  numerous  an  army  for  the  expedition,  and 
could  not  expect  great  success,  if  they  did  not  prove  themselves 
in  arms  altogether  superior  to  the  enemy. 

There  can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  army  was  reinforced  from 
the  other  side  of  Jordan,  after  some  victories  were  achieved; 
but  this  would  not  have  been  the  case  if  they  had  been  de- 
feated on  several  points. 

Joshua  took  a  stronger  force  and  marched  upon  Ai,  laying  at 
night  an  ambush  of  thirty  thousand  men  on  the  west  side  of 
that  city,  who  had  the  orders  not  to  begin  the  attack  until  a 
certain  signal  should  be  given  them  by  the  spear  which  Joshua 
bore,  when  they  should  set  the  city  on  fire  and  attack  the 
enemy  in  the  rear.  This  ambush  was  also  intended  to  prevent 
the  people  of  the  next  city,  Beth  El,  from  joining  the  enemy  at 
Ai.  The  next  morning,  at  the  head  of  five  thousand  men, 
Joshua  marched  around  Ai,   and  took    his   position  on  a  hill 


CHAPTER  IV3  205 

north  of  the  city,  so  that  the  enemy  could  not  retreat  into 
the  interior.  The  king  of  Ai,  on  perceiving  the  Israelites, 
left  the  city  at  the  head  of  his  army  to  attack  them.  Joshua 
however,  did  not  stand  the  attack  and  retreated  in  a  north- 
eastern direction  in  order  to  cut  off  the  enemy  from  the  city. 
After  this  purpose  was  effected  the  signal  was  given  by 
Joshua  and  the  ambush  rushed  to  the  attack,  took  the  city 
by  storm  and  set  it  on  fire ;  at  which  moment  Joshua  confronted 
the  enemy,  who  saw  behind  them  the  city  on  fire,  and  being 
unexpectedly  and  desperately  attacked  in  front  and  rear,  they 
hastily  lied.  Meanwhile  the  people  of  Beth  El  had  arrived  to 
assist  those  of  Ai,  but  were  defeated  by  part  of  the  ambush, 
which  was  strong  enough  to  fight  on  two  different  sides.  Ai 
was  totally  destroyed  by  fire,  twenty-two  thousand  of  the 
enemy  fell,  and  the  rest  retired  to  the  desert.  The  king  of 
Ai  was  caught  and  hung,  and  at  evening  he  was  taken  from  the 
gallows,  and  a  large  heap  of  stones  was  placed  upon  his  body, 
as  a  memorial  of  the  victorious  day.    • 

The  spots  called  Mount  Guerizim  and  Mount  Abal  were 
unknown  as  early  as  the  first  century  after  the  destruction  of 
the  temple.  It  would  appear  that  they  were  in  the  vicinity  of 
Ai  and  Beth  El  and  not  in  that  of  Shechem,  as  modern  critics 
suppose;  because  the  festivities  on  those  mountains,  as  we 
shall  describe  hereafter,  are  recorded  right  after  the  taking  of 
Ai  without  intermediate  warfare.  It  appears  to  us,  that  Moses 
(Deutr.  xxvii)  pointed  out  that  spot  for  erecting  an  altar, 
engraving  and  reading  the  law,  and  celebrating  a  national 
festival,  on  account  of  being  the  spot  where  Abraham  first 
pitched  his  tent  and  built  an  altar,  "  Beth  El  at  the  west  and 
Ai  at  the  east."  That  action  of  Abraham  was  the  first  by 
which  he  took  formal  possession  of  the  land,  and  by  which  he 
gave  birth  to  a  separate  nationality.  Therefore  Joshua,  after 
tliat  spot  was  in  his  possession,  brought  the  people  into  the 
valley,  where  once  Abraham  had  pitched  his  tent;  he  built  an 
altar  of  rough  stones  on  Mount  Abal,  upon  the  stones  the 
review  of  the  law,  Deuteronomy,  was  engraved,  after  which 
a  great   national   festival  was   celebrated;    and    after    having 


206  PERIOD  IT. 

returned  to  the  camp  the  whole  of  the  law  was  read  before  the 
assembled  people,  men,  women  and  children. 

The  expeditions  of  Joshua  against  Jericho  and  Ai  struck 
with  terror  the  hearts  of  many  of  the  Canaanitish  tribes, 
so  that  many  regretted  their  rejection  of  the  terms  of  peace 
which  Joshua  had  offered  when  passing  the  Jordan,  for 
now  they  thought  it  was  too  late  to  sue  for  peace.  The  in- 
habitants of  four  of  the  most  flourishing  cities  in  the  vicinity 
of  Jerusalem,  viz :  Gibeon,  Cephirah,  Baroth  and  Kiriathgea- 
rim,  agreed  upon  sending  ambassadors  to  the  camp  of  the 
Israelites  at  Gilgal,  to  sue  for  peace.  Men  were  appointed 
for  this  purpose,  and  accordingly  repaired  to  Gilgal.  But  fear- 
ing they  might  be  ill  treated  if  they  represented  themselves  as 
Canaanites,  they  resorted  to  a  fiction.  They  put  on  old  gar- 
ments and  worn-out  sandals,  and  took  with  them  old  bread 
and  old  bottles,  and  told  the  Israelites  who  were  there  that  they 
came  from  a  distant  country  to  enter  with  them  into  a  league 
of  mutual  defence.  Nothing  could  be  more  welcome  to  Joshua 
than  to  cultivate  friendly  relations  with  foreign  nations,  where- 
fore Joshua,  Eleazer  and  the  senate,  consented  to  enter  into 
such  a  league  with  them,  without  stipulating  the  necessary 
conditions  for  renouncing  idolatry,  and  submitting  to  the  laws 
of  the  country,  which  must  have  been  made,  had  they  not 
positively  denied  to  be  the  inhabitants  of  any  part  of  Canaan. 
The  league  was  confirmed  by  the  oath  of  the  senate,  and  the 
new  friends  left  the  camp  for  their  home.  The  army  of  the 
Israelites  advanced  rapidly  towards  Jerusalem,  but  after  a 
march  of  three  days  they  came  into  that  part  of  the  land  oc- 
cupied by  the  Gibeonites  and  those  who  were  with  them. 
The  people  murmured  against  the  senate,  that  they  suffered 
themselves  to  be  thus  deceived;  notwithstanding  the  oath  of  the 
senate,  although  given  in  consequence  of  the  deception,  it  was 
sacred  to  the  people,  and  no  hostilities  were  committed  on  the 
Gibeonites  and  their  other  friends.  They  were,  however, 
punished  for  their  deception,  as  they  were  at  all  times  obliged 
to  furnish  the  national  council  and  the  national  sanctuary  with 
servants  to  do  the  lower  kind  of  labor,  such  as  splitting  wood 


CHAPTER    [V. 


207 


and  drawing  water.     It  is  necessary  to  call  the  attention  of 
llif  reader  to  the  fact,   that  everywhere  in  the  book  of  Joshua, 
if  there  is  any  mention  of  waging  war  against  the   Israelites, 
we  find   everywhere  a  king  at  the  head  of  the  hostile  party. 
So   we  found  it  in  Jcrieho,  in  Ai,  and  so  we  read  (ix.   1-2). 
"And    it    came  to   pass    when   all   the    kings    which   are    on 
the    other    side    of    Jordan,    on    the    mountain    and   on   the 
plain,    and    on    all   the    shores  of  the    Great  sea    up    to    the 
Lebanon,  the  Hitite,  the  Emorite,  the  Cananite,  the  Perizitc, 
the  Hivite  and  the  Jebusitc  heard  (those  affairs)  they  gathered 
together  to   make  war  upon   Joshua  and  upon  Israel  with  one 
mouth."'      It    was    then  a  covenant   of  kings,    in  which    the 
people   had  but  a  passive  part;  for  here  in  the   case  of  the 
Gibeonites  and  the  other  cities,   who  made  peace  with  Israel, 
we  hear  of  no  king  whatever;  we   always  hear  of  the  inhabit- 
ants of  such   a  city.      This   is   sufficient  proof  that    the    war 
waged  by  the  Israelites  was  to  decide  who  should  be  master  of 
the  country,    the   Israelites  whose    ancestors   had  first   taken 
possession  of  the  land,  or  the  Hyksos,  the  Anakims,  who  held 
now  the  land  in  possession,  and  ruled  over  almost  all  the  larger 
cities.     That  part  of  the  people  who  remained  obedient  to  the 
Hyksos  or  Anakims  were  treated  as  enemies,    while  those  who 
submitted  to  the  Israelites  were  received  as  friends.     But  the 
first  condition  of  such  a  submission  must  naturally  have  been 
the '  deposition   of  the   Anakim   kings,    which  the   Gibeonites 
effected,   and  therefore  came  to  Joshua  as  a  people.     The  city 
of  Jerusalem,    as  we  know  from  the  records  of  Manetho,  was 
the  principal  city  of  the  Anakims,  so  was  Hebron,  which  they 
called  Kiryath   Arba,    as  we   know    from   the   Bible.     When, 
therefore,   those  Hyksos  or  Anakims  saw  that  the  people  of 
four  strong  and  important  cities  had  thrown  off  their  yoke, 
and  probably  killed  or  driven  away  the  kings  of  their  race, 
five  of  them,  the  kings  of  Jerusalem,  of  Hebron,   of  Jarmuth, 
of  Lachish,   and  of  Eglon,   combined  their  armies   under  the 
chief  command  of  the  king  of  Jerusalem  to  march  upon  Gibeon 
and    those    other    cities   which    had   submitted  to    the    Israel- 
ites, and  enforce  obedience  to  their  authority.     The  combined 


J>08  PERIOD    II. 

army  of  the  Anakims  marched  against  Gibeon,  which  they  be- 
sieged. The  Gibeonites  sent  messengers  to  Gilgal  to  inform 
Joshua  of  their  danger.  This  was  an  important  affair  to  the 
Israelites.  Their  enemies,  those  whom  they  feared  and  hated 
most  violently,  had  concentrated  their  armies,  which  undoubt- 
edly rendered  their  numbers  formidable,  for  Joshua  himself 
seems  to  have  been  afraid  the  result  of  the  engagement  might 
not  be  as  favorable  as  he  wished  (x,  8).  Joshua  led  the  best 
of  his  troops  to  the  spot;  he  came  much  sooner  than  the  enemy 
expected  him.  The  attack  was  a  sudden  and  violent  one;  the 
enemy  could  not  find  time  sufficient  to  organize,  and  were  de- 
feated beneath  the  walls  of  Gibeon.  The  retreat  of  the  enemy 
was  in  good  order;  but  when  they  had  reached  the  declivity  of 
Beth  Horon,  a  horrible  hail  storm,  naturally  connected  with 
darkness,  wind,  and  roaring  thunder,  caused  the  enemy  to  be 
thrown  into  disorder,  so  that  the  pursuing  victors  dispersed 
and  slew  them,  and  the  five  kings  were  obliged  to  seek 
refuge  in  the  dark  recess  of  a  cave.  The  Israelites,  no  less 
frightened  by  the  darkness  which  accompanied  the  hailstorm 
than  was  the  flying  enemy,  were  encouraged  by  Joshua,  who 
showed  them  the  shining  sun  standing  over  Gibeon,  where  the 
clouds  ended,  and  the  moon  over  the  valley  of  Ayelan,  where 
the  battle  was  fought,  smiling  on  their  heroic  actions,  and 
waiting  until  they  should  have  completed  the  brilliant  victoiy. 
Joshua  sent  only  part  of  his  army  in  pursuit  of  the  enemj- ;  he 
himself  with  the  principal  force  encamped  at  Makedah.  Being 
informed  that  the  five  kings  were  secreted  in  a  cave,  Joshua 
gave  orders  to  secure  their  persons,  which  was  accordingly 
done.  Upon  return  of  the  pursuers  the  captives  were  brought 
forth  and  executed.  Joshua  made  the  best  use  of  this  victory; 
after  he  had  taken  Makidah,  Libnah,  Lachish,  and  Eglon,  and 
having  defeated  Horam,  king  of  Gezer,  he  returned  to  the 
camp  at  Gilgal,  and  the  tribes  in  divided  batallions  marched 
against  the  cities,  whose  principal  army  was  defeated,  and 
they  could  neither  concentrate  a  new  force  nor  make  much 
effectual  resistance  against  troops,  accustomed  to  war  and 
victory.     The    tribe  of  Jehudah,    with   the    tribe  of  Simeon 


CHAPTER    IV.  209 

(Judges,  i,  3),  demanded  of  Joshua  in  Gilgal  that  possession 
be  given  them  of  the  southern  part  of  the  country,  which  was 
granted  to  them.  Caleb,  son  of  Jcphunah,  one  of  the  twelve 
spies,  who  visited  Hebron  about  forty  years  before  that,  and 
the  one  who  together  with  Joshua  desired  the  people  to  go  up 
and  make  war  upon  the  Canaanites,  was  entrusted  with  com- 
mand over  the  troops  of  Jehudah  and  Simeon.  This  force 
advanced  towards  Hebron,  which  they  took  and  called  again 
Hebron ;  proceeding  thence  towards  Debir,  which  the  Anakim 
had  called  Kiryath  Sepher.  But  here  the  enemy  were  so  well 
fortified,  that  Caleb  promised  the  hand  of  his  daughter,  Achsah, 
to  him  who  would  take  that  place.  Othniel,  the  son  of  the 
younger  brother  of  Caleb  took  the  place,  and  received  the 
daughter  of  Caleb  as  the  prize  of  victory.  They  pursued  the 
Anakims  with  their  army  from  place  to  place;  they  took  Har- 
mah,  Asah,  Askelon,  not  the  one  of  the  Phelistines,  and  Ekron, 
pressing  the  Anakims  back  to  their  habitations  in  Phelistia. 
Still  they  could  not  subjugate  a  portion  of  the  Canaanites,  who 
had  iron  chariots  of  war,  and  occupied  part  of  the  southern 
plains.  The  sons  of  the  father-in-law  of  Moses  came  up  from 
the  southern  deserts  south  of  Jericho,  and  settled  among  the 
sons  of  Jehudah  and  Simeon. 

The  tribe  of  Benjamin,  most  likely  in  company  with  the 
tribe  of  Dan,  earned  the  fruits  of  the  last  victory,  and,  after 
having  taken  Beth  El,  they  pursued  the  enemy  and  drove 
them  into  the  extreme  west  of  the  country,  across  the  Nahr 
Rubin,  where  the  Anakims  had  their  old  fortifications,  and 
were  too  numerous  to  be  attacked  successfully. 

The  combined  forces  of  Jehudah  and  Benjamin,  however, 
were  insufficient  to  drive  the  Jebusite  from  Jerusalem,  which, 
as  we  afterwards  learn,  was  too  strongly  fortified  to  be  taken. 
The  tribe  of  Ephraim,  and  half  of  the  tribe  of  Menasseh,  who 
were  numerous  and  valorous,  went  further  north,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  driving  back  the  Anakim  into  Phelistia,  but  they 
could  not  succeed  in  taking  Beth  Sheon,  Thanach,  Dor,  Jibleam, 
Meguido,  and  Gezer;  and  peace  was  made  with  the  inhabitants 
of  those  cities,  who,  as  well  as  the  other  places  which  were  not 
14 


210  PERIOD    II. 

taken,  were  made  subject  and  tributary  to  the  Israelites,  agree- 
ably to  the  Mosaic  policy. 

The  tribe  of  Issachar  seems  to  have  made  common  cause 
with  the  half  of  the  tribe  of  Menassah,  who  afterwards  dwelt 
together.  The  tribe  of  Zebulon  went  still  further  north,  and 
finally  obtained  possession  of  the  land  between  the  Sea  of 
Kinneroth  and  the  Mediterranean,  with  the  exception  of  Kitron 
and  Nahalol.  But  this  advance  towards  the  north,  roused  the 
northern  kings  to  a  league  of  defence,  consisting  of  the  kings 
of  Hazar,  of  Madon,  of  Shimron,  of  Achshof,  and  others,  most 
likely  assisted  by  the  numerous  warriors  who  were  driven 
away  from  the  southern  part  of  the  country ;  for  they  concen- 
trated a  numerous  army  at  the  waters  of  Merom,  among  which 
were  a  large  number  of  cavalry  and  chariots  of  war,  both 
of  which  the  Israelites  did  not  possess.  The  position  of  the 
enemy  was  threatening;  for  they  not  only  stood  ready  to  over- 
run the  land  east  of  the  Jordan,  which  could  not  offer  an 
effectual  resistance,  as  above  40,000  men  were  in  the  camp  of 
Joshua,  but  they  threatened  also  to  crush  at  once  the  entire 
nation.  Joshua  was  aware  of  the  danger;  he  collected  his 
army  and  advanced  to  meet  the  enemy.  It  was  again  the 
quick  motions  of  the  army,  which  gave  them  the  victory;  the 
Canaanites  with  their  heavy  chariots  and  heavy  cavalry,  fell 
by  thousands  before  the  light  and  rapid  movements  of  the 
Israelites,  who  were  trained  in  the  desert  and  practiced  in 
many  battles.  The  enemy  were  defeated  and  pursued  in  all 
directions;  their  horses  were  lamed,  their  chariots  burned, 
their  fortifications  reduced,  and  those  who  could  not  flee 
swiftly,  fell  before  the  pursuing  victors.  The  men  of  the  tribes 
of  Asher  and  Naphthali  pursued  after  the  retreating  enemy  to 
the  Lebanon,  and  succeeding  in  driving  them  into  the  moun- 
tains, so  that  all  but  nine  cities  were  taken  by  assault. 
Those  nine  cities,  like  the  other  places  inhabited  by  the  Ca- 
naanites, were  subject  and  tributary  to  Israel. 

Joshua  had  returned  to  Shiloh,  where  he  erected  the  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation,  making  this  place  the  capital  of  the 
country  according  to  the  last  will  of  the  dying  Jacob.     The  land 


CHAPTER  IV.  211 

was  in  their  possession;  the  forces  of  Guilgal  had  been  gradu- 
ally reduced,  as  the  different  tribes  separated  from  the  camp 
and  took  possession  of  the  land  in  the  manner  before  described. 
There  were  but  the  warriors  of  the  Reubenites,  Gadites  and 
Menassites  from  the  eastern  land,  and  probably  a  [few  others 
with  Joshua  in  Shiloh.  It  was  now  the  duty  of  the  govern- 
ment to  divide  the  land  into  equal  lots,  as  the  law  of  Moses 
prescribed.  The  division  of  the  land  of  the  tribes  of  Reuben, 
Gad  and  half  of  Menassah  seems  to  have  been  done  by  Moses, 
and  the  division  of  the  land  of  Jehudah,  Ephraim,  and  the 
other  half  tribe  of  Menassah  had  been  previously  effected; 
but  the  land  of  the  seven  other  tribes  was  yet  undivided. 
The  national  council  assembled  for  this  purpose  in  Shiloh. 
In  accordance  with  the  proposition  of  Joshua  two  men  were 
appointed  of  each  tribe  to  travel  and  to  bring  a  description 
or  probably  a  drawing  of  the  land,  and  also  of  those  parts 
inhabited  by  Canaanites,  in  order  that  the  land  might  be  fairly 
divided  among  the  tribes  according  to  their  respective  num- 
ber of  men.  After  the  drawings  or  descriptions  of  the  country 
had  been  brought  to  Shiloh,  the  division  of  the  land  was 
effected  in  this  manner:  The  southern  part  of  the  land  between 
the  Dead  sea,  Idume,  and  Phelistia  was  given  to  Jehudah  and 
Simeon,  so  that  the  part  of  Simeon  was  bounded  north  and 
east  by  Jehudah,  south  by  the  desert  and  west  by  Phelistia. 
North  of  Jehudah,  between  the  Jordan  and  the  Mediterranean, 
was  Benjamin  on  the  east,  and  Dan  on  the  west;  Dan 
bounded  south  upon  Phelistia.  North  of  Dan  and  Benjamin 
was  the  mountanous  country  of  Ephraim,  between  the  Jordan 
and  the  Mediterranean,  forming  an  irregular  triangle  with  the 
broad  side  on  the  Mediteranean.  North  of  Ephraim  between 
Jordan,  the  Mediterranean  and  the  Phoenician  coast,  was  half  of 
the  tribe  of  Manassah,  intersected  by  the  part  of  Issachar; 
north  of  which,  between  the  Lake  of  Genezareth  and  the  Phoe- 
nician coast,  was  the  part  of  Zebulon;  north  of  which  was 
the  part  of  Asher  in  the  west,  and  Naphthali  on  the  east,  on 
both  sides  of  the  high  waters.  The  north  of  the  whole  was 
bounded  by  the  Lebanon.     The  shores  of  the   Mediterranean, 


212  PERIOD    II. 

with  the  exception  of  about  forty  geographical  miles,  was 
held  by  the  Phelistines  at  the  south,  and  the  Phoenicians  at  the 
north.  After  the  land  had  been  thus  divided  by  the  national 
council,  six  cities  were  set  aside  as  cities  of  refuge  for  the 
manslayer,  three  east  of  Jordan,  Bezer,  Ramoth  and  Golan,  as 
Moses  had  ordained;  and  three  cities  west  of  Jordan,  Kedesch, 
Shechem,  where  Joshua  had  buried  the  remains  of  Joseph,  and 
Hebron. 

Forty-eight  cities  were  then  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Levi, 
including  the  cities  of  refuge  in  the  different  tribes  of  Israel. 

After  affairs  were  thus  far  arranged,  the  subdivisions  of  the 
land  appears  to  have  been  left  to  the  respective  tribes.  Joshua 
called  the  warriors  of  the  two  tribes  and  a  half,  which  had 
come  over  with  them  from  the  other  side  of  Jordan,  and  after 
having  praised  their  valor  and  faithfulness,  and  exhorted  them 
to  remain  faithful  to  the  God  of  Israel,  and  to  the  laws  of 
Moses,  and  having  blessed  them,  he  dismissed  them  to  return 
to  their  home  east  of  Jordan.  They  returned  richly  laden  with 
gold,  silver  and  other  metals,  with  garments  and  with  cattle. 
When  they  had  come  to  the  Jordan,  they  built  at  its  western 
bank  a  large  monument  in  the  form  of  an  altar.  The  national 
council  was  convoked  at  Shiloh  to  consider  what  must  be  done 
with  the  tribes  at  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  as  they  had  erected 
an  altar  contrary  to  the  laws  of  Moses.  It  was  resolved  upon 
sending  ambassadors  to  them  in  order  to  ascertain  the  reason 
why  they  had  built  the  supposed  altar.  Phineas,  the  son  of 
the  then  officiating  high  priest,  and  ten  representatives  of  ten 
different  tribes,  were  dispatched  to  go  beyond  Jordan.  When 
arrived  there  they  were  informed  by  the  people,  that  the  build- 
ing was  not  erected  with  the  intention  of  violating  the  law,  but 
was  designed  to  be  a  memorial  to  future  generations,  that  the 
Israelites  east  of  the  Jordan  were  part  of  that  nation  on  the 
side  of  whom  they  had  fought ;  and  that  the  Jordan  was  not  a 
boundary  between  them  and  the  rest  of  Israel.  The  ambassa- 
dors, highly  gratified  with  this  answer,  returned  to  Shiloh,  and 
brought  this  message  to  the  national  council,  who  were  fully 
satisfied  with   the   answer.     The   army   which   was  already 


CHAPTER     IV.  213 

assembled  to  enforce  obedience  to  the  law  was  disbanded,  and 
peace  was  restored. 

Before  we  proceed  with  our  narrative,  it  is  necessary  for  us 
to  defend  the  old  hero,  Joshua,  against  the  violent  attacks  of 
modern   critics,  who  accuse  him  of  three  imprudent  acts. 

1.  That  he  divided  the  army  into  small  detachments,  and 
instead  of  fighting  the  enemy  with  his  whole  army,  he  let 
every  tribe  fight  separately,  which  lamed  his  forces. 

2.  That  he  became  too  soon  tired  of  war,  and  suspended 
hostile  proceedings  before  the  land  was  brought  under  the 
sway  of  Israel,  which  became  afterwards  a  cause  of  calamity 
to  the  nation. 

3.  That  he  appointed  no  successor  to  his  office,  which  virtu- 
ally sundered  the  tribes,  and  suspended  the  Mosaic  policy. 

In  refutation  of  the  first  accusation  it  must  be  remarked, 
that  neither  Hannibal,  Csesar,  nor  Napoleon  could  have  acted 
otherwise.  He  first  secured  for  his  camp  a  firm  position  in  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan  by  reducing  Jericho  and  Ai.  There  he 
was  in  a  fertile  district  and  in  connection  with  the  people 
beyond  Jordan,  so  that  he  had  no  cause  to  fear  the  want  of 
provisions  or  an  attack  in  the  rear.  We  do  not  see  how  he 
could  have  operated  advantageously  with  the  whole  of  his  army 
in  one  direction,  as  Canaan  is  a  hilly  country,  in  which  small 
and  fortified  towns  were  to  be  reduced  before  the  land  could  be 
occupied.  He  sent  small  detachments  against  the  small  towns, 
which  operated  simultaneously  in  three  directions,  to  the  north, 
to  the  south,  and  to  the  west.  As  soon  as  the  petty  kings 
concentrated  their  forces,  he  met  and  defeated  them  in  pitched 
battles;  after  which,  the  single  detachments  could  continue 
undisturbed  to  reduce  the  smaller  towns.  Had  he  sent  the 
whole  of  his  army  to  each  town,  the  war  would  have  lasted 
about  a  century.  If  he  had  not  maintained  his  position  in 
Gilgal,  the  kings  of  the  north,  whom  he  defeated  at  the  waters 
of  Merom,  would  have  cut  him  off  from  the  people  beyond  Jor- 
dan, and  he  would  have  been  brought  between  two  hostile 
armies ;  the  northern  Canaanites  in  his  rear  and  the  Anakims 
in  his  front.     He  maintained  his  position  at  Gilgal  till  he  had 


214  PERIOD    II. 

nothing  to  fear  from  either  side.  We  would  not  advance,  that 
there  was  a  demonstration  of  particular  wisdom  in  his  opera- 
tions; but  we  believe  it  must  be  admitted,  that  they  were  well 
adapted  to  the  existing  circumstances. 

In  refutation  of  the  second  accusation  it  must  be  remarked, 
that  Joshua  effected  his  purpose  of  obtaining  for  the  Israelites 
the  supremacy  over  Palestine ;  and  this  alone  was  his  mission. 
He  dethroned  the  thirty-one  kings  who  governed  Palestine; 
among  whom  also  were  the  kings  of  those  towns  of  which 
it  is  expressly  remarked,  that  the  aborigines  continued  to 
inhabit  them,  as  for  instance  the  kings  of  Jerusalem  and 
Gezer.*  He  subjected  the  aborigines  to  the  sway  of  Israel, 
as  is  expressly  remarked.!  The  passage  commencing  the 
second  chapter  of  Judges,  was  not  set  by  the  compiler  in 
the  right  place.  It  is  recorded,  that  a  messenger  of  the  Lord, 
or  of  the  national  government,  came  up  from  Gilgal  to  Bochim, 
admonishing  the  Israelites  not  to  make  a  covenant  with  the 
inhabitants  of  the  land,  to  destroy  their  altars,  if  they  would 
not  expose  themselves  to  the  danger  of  having  the  enemy  of 
their  national  institutions  in  the  heart  of  their^country.  The 
messenger  came  from  Gilgal,  consequently  he  must  have  been 
sent  from  that  place,  when  Joshua  was  still  there,  soon  after 
the  single  detachments  begun  their  operations,  one  of  which, 
at  Bochim,  most  likely,  was  not  active  enough,  and  did  not 
come  up  fully  to  the  orders  of  Joshua  in  regard  to  the  ex- 
tinction of  idolatry,  so  that  special  ordinance  was  deemed 
necessary.  The  passage  concludes,  that  they  wept  and  brought 
sacrifices  to  the  Lord.  This  says  plainly  enough,  in  the 
figurative  language  of  those  days,  that  the  message  of  Joshua 
had  the  desired  effect.  The  people  manifested  a  repentence  of 
their  conduct,  and  demonstrated  by  the  act  of  bringing 
sacrifices  to  the  Lord,  that  they  intended  to  comply  with  the 
law. 

The  document  in  which  it  is  stated  that  Joshua  did  not  make 
war  upon  Phelistia,  Tyria  and  the  tribes  on  the  Lebanon  and 

*  Comp.  Joshua  xii,  with  Judges  i. 
t  Judges  i,  21,  28,  30,  33,  35. 


CHAPTER  IV.  215 

east  of  it  up  to  Hamoth,  and  that  he  notwithstanding  should 
divide  the  unconquered  provinces  also  among  the  tribes  of 
Israel,  begins  with  the  words,  "And  the  Lord  said."  If  we 
take  this  as  a  decree  of  the  national  council,  then  if  any  blame 
is  to  be  attached,  it  must  belong  to  the  national  council  and 
not  to  Joshua.  But  it  appears  to  us,  that  it  would  have  been 
both  imprudent  and  inhuman  to  attack  the  Anakims  in  their 
strongest  fortifications,  which  they,  as  their  last  place  of  re- 
fuge, would  have  defended  desperately;  or  to  continue  the  war 
against  those  tribes,  who  had  fortified  themselves  in  the 
mountains,  and  were  supported,  as  we  find  afterwards,  by  the 
king  of  Mesopotamia.  It  is  well  known  that  Joshua,  the 
faithful  discple  of  Moses,  did  not  attach  any  importance  to 
the  sea  coast,  especially  as  they  were  in  possession  of  the  Bays 
of  Carmel  and  Joppa ;  it  was  therefore  not  deemed  indispensably 
necessary  to  possess  it.  Finally  we  must  again  remark,  that 
the  army  of  Joshua  was  by  no  means  strong  enough  to  under- 
take those  hazardous  expeditions,  without  running  the  risk  of 
becoming  too  weak  to  maintain  the  territory  which  they 
already  possessed.  There  was  plenty  of  land  in  their  power, 
the  rest  was  left  to  the  aborigines,  and  to  those  Israelites  who 
might  afterwards  choose  to  come  up  from  the  desert,  and  settle 
in  the  land. 

In  refutation  of  the  third  accusation  it  must  be  observed, 
that  there  is  no  positive  evidence  in  existence,  to  the  effect 
that  Joshua  did  not  nominate  his  successor.  The  biographer 
of  Joshua  every  where  informs  us,  that  Joshua  was  a  faithful 
administrator  of  the  law;  consequently  we  are  entitled  to  the 
inference  that  he  gave  satisfaction  to  the  law  in  regard  to  his 
successor.  The  biographer  of  Joshua  mentions  the  death  of 
the  high  priest,  Eleasar,  without  informing  us  of  his  successor. 
Besides  this,  it  must  be  remembered,  that  Othniel,  the  succes- 
sor of  Joshua,  had  already  distinguished  himself  at  the  time  of 
the  campaign  in  the  south  of  Canaan,  which  was  not  long  after 
the  beginning  of  the  war,  consequently  he  was  not  a  youth 
when  Joshua  died,  nor  can  it  be  supposed,  that  Joshua   would 


216  PERIOD  II. 

not  have  nominated  him  to  be  his  successor,  nor  is  it  at  all 
probable  that  he  left  the  country  in  a  state  of  anarchy. 

The  unequal  division  of  the  land  among  the  tribes  was 
another  cause  of  accusation  by  modern  critics;  but  as  the 
land  was  divided  according  to  the  number  of  persons,  the 
inequality  of  the  territories  of  the  different  tribes  only  confirms 
our  hypothesis,  that  not  all  the  Israelites  came  to  Palestine 
with  Joshua;  the  tribes  of  Jehudah  and  Ephraim  were  most 
numerous,  consequently  their  respective  territories  were  the 
largest.  In  consequence  of  their  preponderance  in  numbers, 
the  successor  of  Joshua,  who  was  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim, 
was  chosen  from  the  tribe  of  Jehudah,  as  it  appears  from  the 
sequel  to  have  been  an  established  policy  to  transfer  the  high- 
est dignity  from  one  tribe  to  the  other.  We  will  pass  some 
more  remarks  on  this  subject  in  the  appendix  to  this  period  and 
consequently  dismiss  it  for  the  present. 

The  author  of  the  book  of  Joshua  has  failed  to  give  us  dates 
as  regards  the  duration  of  the  war,  and  of  the  administration 
of  Joshua;  we  must  therefore  resort  to  the  statements  of  Jose- 
phus.  Joshua  came  to  Shiloh  after  the  close  of  #  the  war 
(Joshua  xviii,),  which  was  after  the  fifth  year  of  the  expedition 
had  ended  (Antiqu.  v.  i,  19).  According  to  these  two  passages 
the  war  lasted  but  five  years.  In  another  passage  of  Joshua 
(xiv,  10),  we  are  informed  that  Caleb  said  to  Joshua,  that  he 
was  then  eighty-five  years  old,  while  he  was  forty  years  old 
when  he  went  with  the  spies  from  Kadesh,  which  must  have 
been  seven  years  after  the  Israelites  had  crossed  the  Jordan ;  still 
it  appears  that  Hebron  was  taken  after  that  time ;  consequently 
the  war  must  have  lasted  seven  years  at  least,  which  period  of 
time  was  also  adapted  in  the  ancient  traditions,  adding  to  it 
that  the  division  of  the  land  also  o  ccupied  seven  years.  But 
from  Joshua  vi,  36,  37,  it  appears  that  Hebron  was  taken 
before  the  battle  of  Merom,  consequently  before  Joshua  came 
to  Shiloh.  It  therefore  appears  to  us,  that  the  war  lasted  but 
five  years;  that  the  words  of  Caleb  were  spoken  when  the 
tribes  commenced  to  divide  the    land  among  their   respective 


CHAPTER    IV.  217 

families,  and  that  his  allusion  to  the  conquest  of  Hebron  is 
only  a  quotation  of  a  historical  fact  in  support  of  his  demands, 
as  the  words  there  TI1K  rurr  ^ix  are  very  indistinct ;  that  the 
division  of  the  land  among  the  tribes  took  two  years ;  and  that 
the  tribes  commenced  the  division  of  the  land  among  their 
respective  families  seven  years  after  they  had  crossed  the 
Jordan. 

In  regard  to  the  time  of  Joshua's  administration,  the  Bible 
contains  no  passage  entitling  "to  even  an  inference.  In  the 
ancient  traditions  the  statements  differ  from  fourteen  to  twenty- 
eight  years,  both  of  which  are  spurious,  on  account  of  being  a 
multiple  of  the  sacred  number  seven.  We  therefore  thought 
best  to  adopt  the  statement  of  Josephus,  that  the  administration 
of  Joshua  lasted  twenty-five  years  (Antiqu.  V.  i,  29). 

Besides  the  quarrel  with  the  people,  from  the  provinces 
beyond  Jordan,  noticed  before,  no  accounts  have  reached  us  of 
the  administration  of  Joshua  after  peace  was  restored.  The 
people  soon  yielded  to  the  civilized  habits  of  the  aborigines, 
and,  contrary  to  the  law,  intermarried  with  those  who  lived  in 
separate  cities,  gradually  yielding  also  to  the  gods  of  the 
Canaanites,  Baal  and  Astarte,  as  they  naturally  must  have 
done,  coming  from  the  wilderness  into  a  civilized  country, 
exchanging  the  rude  and  inconvenient  life  of  the  desert  and  of 
a  long  warfare  for  the  ease  and  enjoyments  of  a  civilized 
country.  Civilization  was  then  so  closely  connected  with  idola- 
trous practices,  that  they  could  not  have  embraced  the  former 
without  the  latter.  This  phenomenon  was  so  often  reproduced 
in  history,  that  it  is  superfluous  to  comment  on  it;  we  only 
need  to  refer  the  reader  to  the  history  of  the  migration  of 
nations  in  the  middle  ages,  which  is  the  best  illustration  of  our 
present  period. 

Joshua  was  not  the  man  to  enforce  the  law,  notwithstanding 
unfavorable  circumstances,  as  Moses  would  have  done;  nor  was 
it  an  easy  task  to  enforce  the  law  in  a  country  which  was  still 
in  the  early  stage  of  organization.  Yet  it  would  not  appear 
from  our  sources,  that  idolatry  or  illegality  progressed  among 
the  people  to  an  alarming  degree  during  the  lifetime  of  Joshua. 


218  PERIOD    II. 

One  speech  of  the  old  warrior  which  is  extant  (Joshua  xxiii, 
xxiv),  is  a  proof  that  he  was  fully  aware  of  the  state  of  affairs, 
and  that  he  opposed  with  all  his  might  the  progress  of  idolatry. 
The  national  council  having  been  convoked  at  Shechem,  where 
father  Jacob  had  taken  all  the  idols  from  his  sons  and  had 
buried  them,  Joshua  addressed  them  in  forcible  terms,  imitating 
the  bold  style  of  his  master,  Moses,  and  also  making  use  of 
the  same  words  which  Jacob  addressed  to  his  sons,  on  the  same 
spot  and  to  the  same  effect;  he  exhorted  them  to  adhere  faith- 
fully to  the  law,  to  worship  God,  and  not  to  permit  the  practice 
of  idolatry  to  deprive  them  of  their  national  ties,  the  peace 
and  prosperity  of  their  country;  he  renewed  with  them  the 
divine  covenant  of  Moses  and  Abraham,  and  they  solemnly 
promised  to  adhere  to  it,  and  fully  to  act  up  to  the  require- 
ments of  that  covenant.  In  commemoration  of  their  sacred 
pledge  'Joshua  then  erected  a  statue  under  an  oak  near  She- 
chem, where  that  convention  took  place,  and  where  most 
likely  Jacob  had  buried  the  idols  of  Shechem ;  he  then  wrote 
the  words  spoken  there  into  the  "  Book  of  the  Law  of  the 
Lord,"  as  a  testimony  of  their  promise;  after  which  he  dis- 
missed the  princes  of  the  people,  to  return  home  and  to  enforce 
obedience  to  the  law.  This  address,  accompanied  by  the 
imposing  circumstances  described  above,  had  the  desired  effect; 
for  "  Israel  served  the  Lord  all  the  days  of  Joshua,  and  all 
the  days  of  the  elders,  who  continued  to  live  after  Joshua;" 
which  may  be  adopted  as  a  general  rule,  but  which  was  not 
without  its  exceptions. 

It  appears  from  Joshua  xxiv,  26,  that  either  part  of  that  oak 
or  the  statue  erected  by  Joshua,  was  kept  afterwards  in  the 
sanctuary  of  the  Lord,  as  a  sacred  relic. 

When  Joshua  was  one  hundred  and  ten  years  old,  he  died  in 
his  house  at  Timnath  Serah  on  Mount  Ephraim,  and  was 
buried  on  his  estate,  which  was  north  of  Mount  Gaash. 
Shortly  afterwards,  also,  Eleasar,  the  high  priest,  died,  who 
was  buried  on  the  estate  of  his  son  Phineas,  on  Mount  Ephraim. 
Othniel,  son  of  Kenaz,  of  the  tribe  of  Jehudah,  succeeded 
Joshua,  and  Phineas  succeeded  his  father  in  office  (1420  b.  c). 


CHAPTER    V.  219 


CHAPTER  V. 

PROM  OTHNIEL  TO  THE  DEMISE  OF  SAMSON  (1420-1132). 

After  the  death  of  Joshua,  the  people  gradually  yielded  to 
all  the  corruptions  of  ancient  civilization.  While  the  author 
of  Judges  merely  informs  us,  that  '*  The  children  of  Israel 
were  wicked  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  they  forgot  the  Lord 
their  God,  and  they  worshiped  the  Baalsj  and  the  Astarte." 
Josephus  speaks  of  that  age  in  the  following  words:  "  After 
this,  the  Israelites  grew  effeminate  as  to  fighting  any  more 
against  enemies,  but  applied  themselves  to  the  cultivation  of 
the  land,  which  producing  them  great  plenty  and  riches,  they 
neglected  the  regular  disposition  of  their  settlement,  and  in- 
dulged themselves  in  luxury  and  pleasures ;  nor  were  they  any 
longer  careful  to  hear  the  laws  that  belonged  to  their  political 
government."  He  then  continues,  "  Since  they  got  large  tri- 
butes from  the  Canaanites,  and  were  indisposed  for  taking 
pains  by  their  luxury,  they  suffered  their  aristocracy  to  be  cor- 
rupted also,  and  did  not  ordain  themselves  a  senate,  nor  any 
such  magistrates  as  their  laws  had  formerly  required,  but  they 
were  very  much  given  to  cultivating  their  fields  in  order  to  get 
wealth,  which  great  indolence  of  theirs  brought  a  terrible 
sedition  upon  them"  (Antiqu.  V.  ii,  27).  Josephus  only  informs 
us  of  the  particulars  of  the  occurences  in  that  time,  while  the 
author  of  Judges  speaks  in  general  terms,  "  They  forgot  the 
Lord  their  God;"  they  did  not  observe  the  law.  They  neglected 
to  meet  at  Shiloh,  where  the  national  sanctuary  was  erected. 
The  national  council  did  not  meet;  consequently,  Othniel,  the 
consular  judge,  as  the  head  of  the  republic  may  properly  be 
called,  had  no  power  to  enforce  the  law,  and  the  high  priest 
had  no  opportunity  to  exercise  a  moral  influence  upon  the  com- 
munity in  favor  of  the  union  of  Israel. 


220  PERIOD    II. 

The  following  story  is  calculated  to  give  us  an  insight  into 
the  state  of  affairs  shortly  after  the  death  of  Joshua.*  There 
was  a  man  on  Mount  Ephraim,  whose  name  was  Michah.  He 
stole  from  his  mother  one  thousand  and  one  hundred  pieces  of 
silver ;  he  repented  of  that  wicked  act  and  returned  the  money 
to  his  mother,  who  having  intended  it  for  sacred  purposes, 
took  two  hundred  of  the  silver  pieces  and  made  of  them  an 
idol,  and  the  utensils  required  for  its  worship.  A  young 
Levite,  who  was  said  to  be  a  grandson  of  Moses,  had  left  his 
home,  and,  traveling  about  the  country,  came  to  the  house  of 
Michah,  who  engaged  the  stranger  as  a  priest  to  his  idol,  and 
perceived  a  special  grace  of  the  Lord  in  the  occasion  of  having 
procured  the  services  of  a  Levite  as  a  priest  of  his  idol. 

The  Canaanites  who  remained  in  the  southern  part  of  the 
land,  on  perceiving  the  state  of  disunion  and  effeminacy 
among  the  Israelites,  drew  together  an  army  provided  with  a 
number  of  iron  chariots  of  war,  and  united  with  the  Canaan- 
ites who  had  sought  refuge  in  Ashkelon  and  Ekron.  They 
attacked  the  tribe  of  Dan,  and  drove  them  back  from  the 
plains,  so  that  they  were  obliged  to  retire  to  the  mountains  in 
the  eastern  part  of  that  tribe,  where  they  had  neither  the 
strength  to  attack  their  enemies  nor  land  enough  to  sustain 
themselves.  Still  no  arrangements  were  made  by  the  other 
tribes  to  assist  Dan.  They  were  obliged  to  send  forth  spies  in 
search  of  a  parcel  of  land,  where  they  might  settle.  Five 
men  of  that  tribe  proceeded  to  the  north  for  that  purpose,  and 
on  their  journey  they  happened  to  come  into  the  house  of 
Michah,  where  they  saw  the  idol  and  its  priest.  They  had  no 
scruples  in  begging  the  priest  to  ask  the  idol  whether  they 
would  be  happy  on  their  journey,  and  the  priest  predicted  to 
them  a  happy  journey.  They  then  proceeded  as  far  north  as 
the  neighborhood  of  Mount  Libanus,  to  the  fountains  of  the 
lesser  Jordan,  where,  at  the  great  plain  of  Zidon,  one  day's 
journey  from  that  city,  they  found  a  place  called  Lavish,  where 
they  found  a  peaceable  and  harmless  people  in  a  fertile  region. 
Having  brought   these   tidings  to  their   brethren,   six  hundred 

♦Compare  Judges  xviii  and  xix,  with  Antiqu.  V.  iii,  1,  2. 


CHAPTER    V.  221 

men  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  with  their  families  and  movable 
property,  set  out  to  occupy  that  place.  They  came  to  Mount 
Ephraim,  and  having  been  informed  of  the  idol  by  their  spies, 
they  entered  the  house  and  took  with  them  the  idol,  the  priest, 
and  his  apparels.  Michah  pursued  them  and  demanded  his 
idol,  but  the  Danites  threatened  to  kill  him  and  his  family, 
and  so  the  idol  was  left  in  their  possession.  The  Danites  pro- 
ceeded to  Layish,  where  they  found  very  little  resistance. 
They  drove  away  the  aborigines  and  took  possession  of  the 
city,  which  they  called  Dan.  The  idol  was  set  up,  and  the 
Levite  and  his  descendants  were  the  priests  of  that  city,  as  long 
as  the  house  of  the  Lord  was  in  Shiloh,  consequently  up  to  the 
days  of  Samuel.  The  Danites  of  the  north,  most  likely  pro- 
voked by  the  unjudicial  conduct  of  the  other  tribes  towards 
them,  separated  themselves  from  Israel,  in  consequence  of 
which  they  were  also  obliged  to  have  a  national  deity  of  their 
own,  which  the  idol  of  Michah  was  to  them.  The  separation 
of  that  city  from  the  rest  of  the  country  lasted  until  Samuel 
succeeded  in  reuniting  more  firmly  the  different  tribes. 

It  can  not  be  ascertained  precisely  how  long  after  the  death 
of  Joshua  this  event  occurred,  still  the  fact  that  the  priest  of 
that  idol  was  supposed  to  have  been  a  grandson  of  Moses,  is  a 
sufficient  evidence  that  it  occurred  soon  after  the  death  of 
Joshua. 

This  was  a  dangerous  state  for  the  Mosaic  institutions, 
which  would  have  hastened  rapidly  to  annihilation,  had  it  not 
been  for  an  invasion  and  subjugation  of  the  country  by  the 
king  of  Mesopotamia,  which  aroused  the  people  to  united 
action,  to  which  end  they  were  obliged  to  flock  to  their  safest 
standards,  the  laws  of  Moses.  Cushan  Rishathaim,  king  of 
Mesopotamia,  most  likely  at  the  request  of  the  Canaanites, 
who  had  been  driven  into  the  northern  mountains,  invaded 
Palestine.  The  veteran  soldiers  of  Joshua  had  been  gathered 
to  their  fathers,  the  young  generation  was  effeminated,  the 
tribes  were  disunited,  a  national  government  did  not  exist, 
the  consular  judge  had  no  power;  consequently  Cushan  suc- 
ceeded in  defeating  and  subjecting  one  tribe  after  the  other  to 


222  PERIOD    II. 

his  sway.  This  state  of  things  lasted  for  eight  years,  until  it 
aroused  the  national  pride  of  Israel,  who  in  order  to  make 
atonement  for  the  lasting  disgrace  united  once  more  under 
their  national  head,  Othniel,  who  was  inspired  for  the  cause 
of  his  nation.  At  the  head  of  a  small  army,  Othniel,  attacked 
the  garrison  of  Cushan,  whom  Josephus  calls  Assyrians,  and 
defeated  them  on  all  sides.  The  victories  had  the  effect  of 
attracting  numerous  volunteers  to  the  national  standard. 
Othniel  continued  the  war  of  defence,  and,  according  to  Jose- 
phus, he  succeeded  in  driving  the  army  of  Cushan  over  the 
Euphrates,  to  the  shores  of  which  river  he  pursued  them. 

This  was  a  wholesome  and  electrifying  shock,  tending  to 
regenerate  the  nation.  Forty  years  of  peace  followed,  which 
was  interrupted  by  the  following  lamentable  occurrence,  which, 
however,  plainly  shows  that  the  union  of  Israel  was  unim- 
paired, that  the  Mosaic  institutions  were  reverently  preserved, 
and  that  no  kind  of  idolatry  disgraced  the  country. 

A  Levite,  who  resided  on  Mount  Ephraim,  had  a  concubine 
from  Bethlehem,  of  Jehudah,  who  left  her  husband  and  went 
to  her  father.  The  Levite  followed  her,  and  after  having 
spent  some  days  with  his  father-in-law,  the  young  man  prepared 
to  return  home.  The  Levite,  his  concubine,  and  a  young  man, 
came  to  Gibeah,  a  town  of  Benjamin,  towards  evening,  where 
an  old  man  gave  them  shelter  in  his  house.  But  after  awhile 
some  of  the  wicked  inhabitants  of  the  place  surrounded  the 
house,  as  once  the  people  of  Sedom  did  the  house  of  Lot,  and 
demanded  to  see  the  stranger  who  had  come.  The  old  man 
could  not  persuade  the  rebels  not  to  commit  such  a  Sedomite 
wickedness,  but  they  would  not  retire  to  their  houses  until 
they  had  taken  the  concubine  and  misused  her  until  she  died. 
The  Levite  arose  in  the  morning,  took  his  dead  concubine  and 
returned  home,  when  he  cut  her  body  into  twelve  pieces,  which 
he  sent  to  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel.  This  had  the  effect  of 
convoking  the  national  council  at  a  height  near  Beth  El,  and  all 
the  Israelites,  eleven  tribes,  stood  ready  to  punish  the  tribe  of 
Benjamin.  The  Levite  was  heard  before  the  council,  and  that 
body  determined  on  raising  an  army,  consisting  of  every  tenth 


CHAPTER   V.  223 

man  in  Israel,  to  punish  the  inhabitants  of  Gibeah,  of  Benja- 
min. The  army  was  concentrated,  messengers  sent  to  the 
authorities  of  Gibeah  to  demand  the  criminals  who  had  taken 
part  in  the  affair.  But  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  revolted  against 
the  nation  and  raised  an  army,  competent  to  oppose  effectually 
the  national  army.  The  army  marched  towards  the  rebellious 
city,  but  the  first  attack  made  upon  the  city  by  Jehudah  was 
repulsed  with  a  great  loss  on  the  side  of  the  assailants. 
Another  day  a  renewed  attack  was  made  upon  the  city  with 
no  better  consequences  than  the  first.  This  embittered  the 
contesting  parties,  and  when  on  the  third  attack  the  city  was 
taken  by  a  stratagem  similar  to  that  of  Joshua  at  Ai,  every 
living  being  was  massacred,  the  cities  were  set  on  fire,  and  but 
six  hundred  men  of  the  whole  tribe  escaped,  and  they  hid 
themselves  among  the  rocks  of  Rimon. 

When  the  army  had  returned  to  Mizpah,  they  swore  that 
none  should  give  his  daughter  to  a  man  of  Benjamin.  But  when 
the  national  council  had  again  assembled  at  Beth  El,  the  loss 
of  a  whole  tribe  was  sincerely  regretted,  and  means  were  de- 
vised to  preserve  the  tribe  by  the  six  hundred  men  who  had 
been  found  among  the  rocks  of  Rimon.  It  was  ascertained 
that  notwithstanding  the  solemn  proclamation,  the  inhabitants 
of  Jabesh  Guilead  had  not  sent  their  representation  to  the 
national  council.  They  appear  to  have  been  determined  to 
enforce  obedience  to  the  laws  at  all  hazards.  Twelve  thousand 
armed  men  were  sent  to  Jabesh  Guilead,  who  massacred  all 
that  could  not  flee,  and  brought  four  hundred  damsels  as  cap- 
tives, who  were  given  in  marriage  to  the  men  of  Benjamin, 
and  as  regards  the  rest  they  were  advised  to  lay  in  wait  in  the 
vineyards  of  Shiloh  at  the  annual  festival.  And  when  the 
daughters  of  Shiloh  came  out  to  perform  their  dances,  each  one 
to  take  a  wife  from  among  the  number,  which  the  sons  of 
Benjamin  did,  so  that  the  oath  should  not  be  violated. 

The  severity  of  these  transactions  can  not  but  affect  us  dis- 
agreebly  in  this  age  of  civilization  and  refinement;  but  we 
should  remember,  that  less  severe  measures  would  not  have 
been  efficient  to  restore  union  and  order. 


224  PERIOD    II. 

The  time  at  which  this  lamentable  occurrence  took  place  can 
not  be  ascertained  with  certainty.  Joseplms  narrates  it  pre- 
viously to  the  victory  of  Othniel  over  Cushan  Rishathaim 
(Antiqu.  V.  ii,  8);  but  it  is  evident,  that  before  that  war  the 
tribes  were  not  as  closely  united  as  our  sources  inform  us  that 
they  were  against  Benjamin.  It  did  not  take  place  during 
that  war,  because  they  could  not  have  undertaken  such  a  com- 
mon action  if  they  had  been  threatened  by  a  foreign  enemy. 
It  could  not  have  occurred  after  the  death  of  Othniel,  because 
Phineas,  the  high  priest,  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  that 
story.  Therefore  we  fixed  its  time  during  the  last  years  of 
Othniel.  We  shall  attempt  in  the  appendix  to  this  Period  to 
show  why  the  author  did  not  mention  the  name  of  Othniel. 

Othniel  died  (about  1381  b.  c),  and  was  succeeded  by  Ehud, 
a  left-handed  man  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  who  most  likety 
had  been  appointed  to  this  dignity  previous  to  the  above  oc- 
currence, but  did  not  enter  into  office  till  after  the  demise  of 
Othniel.     Amnion  and  Moab,  being  actually  but  one  nation,  in 
connection  with  Amalek  disturbed  the  peace  of  the  Israelites. 
They  succeeded  under  their  king,  Eglon,  to  subject  to  their 
sway  the  southern  part  of  the  country.    After  a  series  of  bloody 
engagements,  Eglon  advanced  as  far  as  Jericho,  where  he  had 
built  for  himself  a  palace,  and  where  he  received  the  tribute  of 
the  oppressed  people.     It  must  be  remembered,  that  this  inva- 
sion was  the  more  threatening  to  the  Israelites,  because  it  cut 
off  their  way  to  the  interior  of  the  desert,  where,  as  has  been 
remarked  before,  many  Israelites  had  remained.     This  trouble 
lasted  eighteen  years,  and  Ehud,  unsuccessful  in  organizing  an 
army  in  order  to  expel  the  invader,  resorted  to  the  same  means 
to  which  the  Roman,  Mutuins  Sccevola,  had  recourse  under  simi- 
lar circumstances.     Ehud  brought  the  tribute  of  the  Israelites 
to  Eglon  saying,   that  he  had  a  secret  to   communicate  to  him 
in  the  name  of  the  Deity,  whereupon  Eglon   dismissed  his  at- 
tendants and  rose  from  his  chair  to  hear  the  divine  mission, 
which  opportunity  Ehud  improved  by  assassinating  the  oppres- 
sor of  his  country. 

Having  accomplished  his  purpose,  Ehud  locked  the   door 


CHAPTER    V.  225 

upon  the  expiring  Eglon  and  hastened  towards  Mount  Ephraim, 
and  before  the  officers  of  the  king  had  detected  the  act,  he  was 
out  of  their  reach:  lie  returned  to  Mount  Ephraim,  collected 
an  army,  and  attacked  the  invaders  with  great  success.  They 
were  driven  from  the  country,  and  Moab  was  humiliated  before 
Israel. 

This,  however,  is  all  the  historical  account  we  have  of  the 
eighty  years  after  Othniel.  One  judge  more,  Shamgar,  son  of 
Anath,  is  mentioned  during  those  eighty  years;  but  all  that  we 
know  of  him  is  that  "he  smote  the  Phelistines,  six  hundred  men, 
with  an  ox-goad,  and  he  also  delivered  Israel."  But  we  have 
no  means  to  ascertain  the  particulars  of  this  first  hostility  of 
the  Phelistines  against  Israel  after  the  conquest  of  the  land. 
In  the  song  of  Deborah  another  judge  is  mentioned,  Jael,  to 
have  flourished  during  those  eighty  years.  This  passage  is  also 
in  that  song: 

"  In  the  days  of  Shamgar,  the  son  of  Anath,  in  the  days 
of  Jael,  the  highways  were  unoccupied,  and  the  travelers 
walked  through  by-ways.  The  inhabitants  of  the  villages 
ceased,  they  ceased  in  Israel,  until  that  I,  Deborah,  arose,  that 
I  arose  a  mother  in  Israel.  They  choose  new  gods;  then  was 
war  in  the  gates :  was  there  a  shield  or  spear  seen  among  forty 
thousand  in  Israel?  My  heart  is  toward  the  governors  of 
Israel  that  offered  themselves  willingly  among  the  people: 
Bless  ye  the  Lord  (Judges  v,  6-9). 

The  forty  thousand  men  mentioned  here,  having  fought  without 
shield  and  spear,  most  likely  were  the  army  of  Shamgar,  who 
fought  with  an  ox-goad.  This  passage  gives  us  a  sad  prospect 
of  the  condition  of  the  country  in  the  times  of  Jael,  which 
however  was  not  terminated  in  the  time  of  Deborah,  who  was 
appointed  judge  of  Israel  about  1302  b.  c.  Whether  she  was 
appointed  to  that  dignity  on  account  of  her  personal  qualities, 
having  been  a  prophetess,  and  a  woman  of  fervent  devotion,  or 
on  account  of  her  family,  we  do  not  know,  although  the  former 
is  much  more  probable.  At  all  events,  it  is  evident  that 
woman  held  a  higher  position  among  the  ancient  Israelites  than 
modern  writers  are  willing  to  admit. 
15 


226  PERIOD    II. 

The  Canaanites  of  the  north,  as  we  have  mentioned  before, 
were  forced  back  into  Lebanon  after  the  battle  of  the  Waters 
of  Merom.  and  were  defeated  again  in  the  invasion  of  Cushan;  * 
there  they  appear  to  have  lived  for  a  long  time  in  organized 
communities;  for  we  see  them  during  the  administration  of 
Deborah,  come  down  from  the  mountains  with  a  well-disciplined 
army  and  nine  hundred  chariots,  under  the  command  of  Sisera, 
the  chief  captain  of  Jab  in,  a  descendant  of  the  kings  of  Hazar, 
who  resided  in  Haroshath  Hagoyim  (fortress  of  nations), 
which  name  seems  to  indicate  the  union  of  more  nations.  The 
Israelites,  chiefly  those  of  the  north,  suffered  severely  from  the 
attacks  of  the  enemy,  who  held  the  country  in  a  state  of  sub- 
jection for  twenty  years.  After  this  time,  Deborah  sent  for 
Barak,  son  of  Abinoam,  of  Kadash  in  Naphthali,  and  ordered 
him  to  collect  ten  thousand  men  of  Naphthali  and  Zebulon,  who 
had  suffered  most  by  the  invaders,  and  to  lead  them  against 
the  enemy  who  held  strong  positions  at  the  River  of  Kishon. 
But  Barak  refused  to  venture  the  hazardous  expedition  unless 
Deborah  went  with  him,  which  she  reluctantly  did.  An  army 
of  ten  thousand  men  was  collected  at  Kadash  of  Naphthali, 
which  Barak  and  Deborah  led  up  Mount  Tabor.  Sisera,  being 
advised  of  this  at  his  residence,  hastened  into  the  camp,  which 
was  soon  after  attacked  by  Barak,  and  so  beaten,  that  Sisera, 
who  could  not  flee  quickly  enough  in  his  chariot,  in  that  moun- 
tainous region,  left  it  and  fled  on  foot.  On  his  flight  he  passed 
the  tent  of  a  Cainite,  of  the  descendants  of  Jethro,  whose  wife, 
Jael,  invited  the  pursued  and  tired  enemy,  Sisera,  to  her  tent, 
and  treacherously  assasinated  him  when  he  was  sleeping  there 
under  her  promised  protection.  Barak  cleared  the  country 
of  the  invaders,  and  restored  again  the  independence  of  the 
nation.  This  heroic  campaign  was  eternized  by  a  beautiful 
epopee  (Judges  v),  of  which  we  learn  that  the  other  tribes 
despairing  of  the  success  refused  to  take  part  in  the  expedition, 
for  which  they  are  severely  rebuked  in  the  poem,  while  the 
bravery  of  Zebulon  and  Naphthali  are  highly  praised.  Only 
the  princes  of  Issachar  are  mentioned  as  having  promised  their 
aid.     Deborah  governed  the  land  twenty  years  longer,  which 


CHAPTER    V.  227 

together  with  the  time  of  subjection,  made  forty  years  (Don 
Abarbanel).  Towards  the  end  of  the  administration  of  that 
heroic  and  poetical  woman,  the  Israelites  were  again  visited 
by  their  enemies.  It  was  again  the  southern  land  which  was 
subjected  to  the  robbing  incursions  of  the  nomadic  tribes  of  the 
desert,  headed  by  Ammonites  and  Amalekites,  who  came  up 
in  immense  numbers  on  their  camels,  and  robbed  the  fruits  of 
the  field  as  well  as  the  domestic  animals,  destroying  what  they 
could  not  take  along.  The  Israelites  were  obliged  to  retire  to 
the  mountains,  their  natural  castles,  and  the  land  of  the  plains 
was  laid  waste.  The  invaders  came  up  as  far  north  as  Asah, 
so  that  famine  and  poverty  drove  the  Israelites  to  arms.  In- 
spired speakers  (Judges  vi,  8)  encouraged  the  people  to  a 
united  attack  upon  the  enemy,  which  soon  brought  its  proper 
fruits.  A  messenger  of  the  Lord,  or  most  likely  a  messenger 
of  the  national  council,  which  was  in  session  at  Shiloh,  came  to 
Gideon,  the  son  of  Joash,  of  the  tribe  of  Menassah,  bringing 
him  the  message  that  he  was  appointed  to  lead  an  army  against 
the  enemy  who  had  devastated  the  country  those  seven  years. 
Gideon  was  a  simple,  unaspiring  republican,  and  therefore 
could  not  comprehend  how  he  was  appointed  to  this  dignity,  as 
his  family  was  the  poorest  of  Menasseh,  and  he  was  the 
youngest  son  of  his  father,  although  he  was  a  direct  descendant 
of  the  prince  of  the  tribe;  and  as  the  expression  used  by  him, 
M  my  thousand,"  and  afterwards  by  the  captive  princes,  telling 
him  of  his  brothers,  "As  thou  art  they  are,  as  the  figure  of 
one  of  the  sons  of  the  king,"  inform  us,  that  he  was  high  in 
rank,  which  his  personal  appearance  fully  indicated.  The 
messenger  that  brought  him  the  message  convinced  him  that 
God  would  assist  him,  and  Gideon  accepted  the  charge.  He 
built  an  altar  at  the  place  where  he  had  received  the  important 
message,  which  he  called,  God  is  Peace,  and  which  was  yet 
seen  in  Ophrah  at  the  time  when  the  book  of  Judges  was  com- 
piled. He  commenced  his  operations  in  a  singular  manner;  he 
went  at  night,  accompanied  by  ten  of  his  servants,  and  destroyed 
the  idol  and  the  altar  of  Baal,  for  which  he  would  have  been 
killed  by  the  inhabitants  of  Ophrah,  had  not  his  father  per- 


228  PERIOD     II. 

suadecl  them,  that  Baal,  if  he  was  a  god,  would  take  vengeance 
for  this  sacrilegious  act,  wherefore  he  was  surnamed  Jerubaal. 
He  had  sent  messengers  to  the  north,  to  those  tribes  who  were 
not  under  the  immediate  control  of  the  invaders,  and  he  was 
soon  surrounded  by  a  respectable  army,  although  the  tribe  of 
Ephraim  did  not  send  its  warriors.  He  marched  his  army 
across  the  Jordan  and  encamped  on  Mount  Gilead.  while  the 
enemy  was  encamped  on  the  plains  between  the  north  of  Mount 
Gilead  and  the  Jordan.  This  position  of  Gideon  was  well 
calculated  to  cut  off  the  enemy's  retreat.  He  left  twenty-two 
thousand  men  on  the  mountains,  and  descended  into  the  plain 
ten  thousand  strong,  who  encamped  at  the  foot  of  the  moun- 
tains, while  he  with  an  advanced  guard  of  three  hundred 
advanced  towards  the  enemy's  camp. 

When  coming  at  the  dead  of  night  so  near  the  enemy's  camp 
that  he  could  hear  them  talk,   telling  each   other  discouraging 
dreams,   and  finding  them  altogether  unprepared  for  a  battle; 
he  perceived  that  a  sudden  attack  in  the  dead  of  night,  so  that 
they  could  not  see  plainly  the  number  of  his  men,  would  strike 
terror  in  the  whole  camp,  and  he  might  succeed  in   routing 
them  at  once   and  driving  them  towards  the  interior,  where 
they    would  be    disarmed   and  massacred  by   the   embittered 
Israelites.     But  being  too  far  advanced  from  his  camp  to  effect 
such  a  nightly  surprise  by  an  adequate  force,  Gideon  resorted  to 
a  stratagem  of  a  singular  nature;  he  gave  to  each  of  his  three 
hundred  companions  at  arms  a  trumpet,  a  pitcher,  and  a  torch 
light,  ordering  them  to  keep  the  lights  hidden   until  they  saw 
him  break  his  pitcher,  uncover  the  light  and  blow  the  trumpet, 
when  they  should  do  as  he  did.     While  the  many  torch  lights 
wTere  calculated  to  deter  the  enemy  by  the  strong  light,   and 
probably  also  to  set  fire  on  their  tents,   the  trumpets  were 
intended  to  magnify   his    number.     The    men    advanced    and 
reached  the  camp  about  midnight,   which  they  attacked  from 
three  different  points,  shouting,  "  For  God  and  Gideon."     The 
enemy  could  not  find  time  to  organize;  the  trumpets  and  the 
torch  lights,  and  undoubtedly  also  the  burning  tents  had  con- 
fused them  so  much,  that  they  fled  in  the  greatest  disorder  in 


CHAPTER    V.  909 

a  northern  direction.     But  there  they  met  with   warriors  from 
the  tribes  of  Naphthali,  Ashcr  and  Menassah,  while  those  of 
Ephraim  had  come  down,  and  had  taken  post  along  the  Jordan, 
so  that  the    enemy  could  not  escape.     The  Ephraimites   suc- 
ceeded in  disbanding   the  retreating  enemy  and  capturing  two 
of  their  chiefs,  who  were  delivered  to  Gideon,   and  executed 
in  Jakeb    Scab;  but  part  of  the  enemy  had  succeeded   in   es- 
caping in  a  southern   direction,  and  Gideon  pursued  them  with 
his  army.     He  came  with  his   men  to  Succoth  weary  and  lan- 
guishing.    He  asked  of  the  inhabitants   of  that  place    to  give 
him  bread  for  his   men;  but  they  ironically  refused  to  comply 
with  his  wishes.     Gideon  threatened  them  with  severe  punish- 
ment, but  lost  no  time  in  pursuing  the  enemy;  he  proceeded  to 
the  south,  and  having  come  to  Penual,  he  again  demanded  pro- 
visions lor  his  hungry  warriors,  but  received  the  same  refusal 
as  in  Succoth.     Continuing  his  hasty  march,  Gideon  overtook 
the  wreck  of  the  enemy's  army,  which  he  discomfited,  captur- 
ing its  chiefs,  with  whom  he  returned,  and  on  the  way  severely 
chastising  the  inhabitants  of  Penuel,  and  of  Succoth  for  their 
reckless  behavior  towards  an  army,  which  had  saved  the  coun- 
try, he  executed  the  two  Midianitish  chiefs  for  having  killed 
his  brothers,   and  finally  reached  his  home.     The  Ephraimites 
were  displeased,  that  he  did  not  call  on  them  especially  to  aid 
him ;  still  they  were  made  satisfied  by  ascribing  to  them  the 
principal  glory  of  the  campaign.     The   Israelites  had  taken  a 
large  booty  from  the  enemy  in  gold  and  purple  garments,   and 
Gideon  asked  of  each  of   his   soldiers  one   of  the  nose  rings 
which  they  had  taken  from  the  enemy,  of  which  gold  Gideon 
set  up  a  monument  at  his  place,  which,  as  was  the  case  with 
almost  all  monuments   of  antiquity,    was   afterwards  foolishly 
adored,   and  finally  worshiped  as  an   idol,   bringing   disgrace 
upon  the  house  of  the  hero.    After  the  demise  of  Deborah  (about 
1263  b.  c),  Gideon  succeeded  her  in  the  highest  office  of  the 
nation.     His  victorious  operations  had  so  inspired  the  Israel- 
ites in  favor  of  the  hero,   that  they  offered  to  him  the  heredi- 
tary dignity  of  the  chief  magistrate  of  the  nation ;  but  Gideon 
rejected  this  offer  in  truly  republican  words:  "  I  shall  not  rule 


230  PERIOD   II. 

over  you,  nor  shall  my  son  rule  over  you,  God  shall  rule  over 
you."  He  could  hardly  be  persuaded  to  take  the  lead  during 
nis  life  time,  and  being  over-persuaded  to  do  so,  as  Josephus 
informs  us,  he  governed  the  nation  about  forty  years,  during 
which  time  peace  and  prosperity  came  home  to  the  nation;  he 
died  and  was  buried  at  Ophroh,  the  principal  town  of  the  dis- 
trict of  Ezer  (AbiEser;    about  1223  b.  c). 

Gideon  had  left  seventy  sons  of  his  numerous  wives,  besides 
one,  Abimelch,  of  his  concubine  Drumah,  who  was  from 
Shechem.  This  Abimelech  went  to  Shechem  after  the  death  of 
Gideon,  the  inhabitants  of  which  town  assisted  him  with 
money,  for  which  he  engaged  a  number  of  unprincipled  men, 
who  went  with  him  to  Ophrah,  where  he  slew  the  sons  of 
Gideon,  of  whom  but  one,  Jotham,  escaped.  Having  returned 
from  that  horrible  expedition,  the  men  of  Shechem  and  of  Beth 
Mylo  held  a  meeting  at  a  place  where  a  large  oak  stood,  most 
likely  the  same  mentioned  in  the  last  speech  of  Joshua,  and 
proclaimed  Abimelech  king  of  Israel.  Jotham  the  youngest 
son  of  Gideon  was  present,  and  addressed  the  people  against 
Abimelech;  but  however  true  and  beautiful  his  words  are, 
which  are  preserved  (Judges  ix,  7-20)  in  the  sacred  records, 
still  he  was  obliged  to  flee  to  Bear,  a  place  beyond  Jordan 
(Numb,  xxi),  and  Abimelech  was  proclaimed  king.  The  city 
in  which  the  Baal  Berith  was  set  up,  as  a  sign  of  the  new 
covenant  by  which  the  old  laws  were  dethroned,  and  the  center 
of  gravity  of  the  nation,  its  religion,  was  denied,  could  but 
proclaim  a  despotic  ruler,  whose  hands  were  covered  with  the 
blood  of  his  brothers.  "Abimelech  made  the  government 
tyrannical,  and  constituted  himself  a  lord,  to  do  what  he 
pleased,  instead  of  obeying  the  laws,  and  he  acted  most  rigidly 
against  those  that  were  the  patrons  of  justice"  (Antiq.  V,  c. 
vii,  §  1).  It  appears  from  our  records  that  his  power  did  not 
reach  very  far,  and  that  his  own  constituents  soon  hated  him 
on  account  of  his  haughtiness.  The  inhabitants  of  Schechem 
soon  repented  of  having  assisted  Abimelech,  and  they  supported 
secretly  a  band  of  armed  men,  who  laid  in  wait  on  the  high- 
ways to  assassinate  the  usurper;  but  those  hirelings  robbed 


CHAPTER    V.  231 

the  travelers,  not  being  restrained  by  any  authority,  and  could 
not  reach  Abimelech,  who  had  been  informed  of  the  conspiracy. 

The  dissatisfaction  of  the  citizens  ol  Shechem,  however,  had 
reached  the  highest  point,  and  an  outbreak  was  expected, 
wherefore  Zebul,  the  chief  captain  of  the  city,  told  Abimelech 
to  be  on  his  guard.  Gaal,  the  son  of  Ehed,  with  his  kinsmen, 
had  come  to  Shechem,  in  whom  the  inhabitants  of  that  place 
had  great  confidence.  It  was  at  the  time  of  vintage,  which  is 
an  occasion  of  feasting  in  all  wine-producing  countries.  In 
Shechem  the  vintage  was  attended  with  many  feasts  and  hea- 
then games,  at  one  of  which  the  people  gave  utterance  to  their 
dissatisfaction  towards  Abimelech.  Gaal  son  of  Ehed  exhorted 
the  people  to  be  subjects  to  the  descendants  of  Hamor,  the 
founder  of  that  city,  rather  than  to  Abimelech;  he  concluded 
thus :  "If  one  would  give  this  people  into  my  hands  I  would 
bring  Abimelech  out  of  the  way."  The  Shechemites  promised 
him  effectual  assistance,  and  Gaal  took  the  lead  in  an  open 
revolt  against  Abimelech.  Gaal  had  intended  to  surprise 
Abimelech  at  his  residence,  but  he,  being  informed  of  every 
thing,  came  up  to  the  city  with  a  sufficient  force,  and  laid  in 
ambush,  and  when  Gaal  sallied  forth  he  attacked  and  defeated 
him.  Gaal  fled  back  to  the  city  with  a  considerable  loss  of 
men,  where  he  was  received  by  Zebul  and  driven  from  the 
city  as  a  coward.  Abimelech  marched  the  next  morning  to- 
wards the  city  in  three  divisions,  massacring  those  who  could 
not  escape  quick  enough,  and  reduced  the  fortifications  of  the 
city.  Those  who  were  in  the  tower  of  Shechem  fled  into  the 
fortified  temple  of  Baal  Berith,  where,  according  to  an  idola- 
trous custom,  they  thought  themselves  safe;  but  Abimelech 
surrounded  the  building  with  wood,  which  was  set  on  fire, 
and  all  that  were  in  the  temple,  one  thousand  men,  women 
and  children,  perished  in  the  flames. 

Thola  the  son  of  Puah,  who  had  been  appointed  consular 
judge  after  Gideon,  resided  in  Shamir  on  Mount  Ephraim.  He 
did  nothing  against  the  rebellious  city  of  Shechem  and  Abim- 
elech, although  the  law  gave  him  full  liberty  to  chastise  them 
(Deutr.    xiii,    13).     It   therefore   appears,   that   the   national 


232  PERIOD    II. 

government  was  impotent.  Abimelech,  encouraged  by  his  suc- 
cess in  Shechem,  marched  with  his  army  to  crush  the  national 
government.  On  coming  to  Thebez  on  Mount  Ephraim,  he 
found  the  city  in  a  state  of  defence,  and  was  obliged  to  take 
it  by  assault.  But  there  was  a  strong  tower  in  the  city,  into 
which  the  inhabitants  fled.  Abimelech  intending  to  set  the 
building  on  fire  came  near  it,  and  was  struck  by  a  flat  stone 
thrown  upon  him  by  a  woman ;  he  ordered  his  servant  to  kill 
him,  that  it  should  not  be  said  that  he  died  by  the  hand  of  a 
woman,  which  his  servant  did.  So  perished  the  first  tyrant  of 
Israel,  after  an  attempt  of  three  years'  duration  to  establish 
despotism  upon  the  ruins  of  the  republic.  Tholah,  son  of 
Puah,  remained  in  office  for  twenty-three  years.  His  adminis- 
tration is  noticed  for  no  other  event;  profound  peace  dis- 
tinguished his  days;  he  died  about  1200  b.  c.  The  successor 
of  Tholah  was  Havoth  Jair,  a  Gileadide,  who  had  thirty  sons 
riding  upon  thirty  asses,  after  whom  the  thirty  places  of 
Havoth  Jair  in  Gilead  were  called.  His  administration  lasted 
twenty-two  years,  and  is  distinguished  for  his  expeditions 
against  the  aborigines  northeast  of  the  Jordan.  He  added 
thirty  villages  to  the  province  of  Menassah,  which  he  called 
Havoth  Jair,  on  account  of  the  name  of  the  district  to  which 
he  added  them.* 

He  was  succeeded  by  Abzon,  of  Beth  Lehem,  about  1178 
b.  c,  who  governed  the  nation  during  seven  years  of  peace. 
According  to  an  ancient  tradition,  it  was  in  the  time  of  Abzon 
when  Ruth,  the  great-grandmother  of  David,  emigrated  with 
her  mother-in-law  from  Moab  to  Bethlehem,  in  Jehudah.  The 
story  was  this.  Elimelech  and  his  wife  Naomi  had  left  their 
native  place,  Bethlehem,  on  account  of  a  famine,  and  emigrated 
to  the  land  of  Moab.  Elimelech  died  early,  and  his  two  sons, 
Mahli  and  Chilion,  took  in  marriage  two  Moabitish  women, 
Ruth  and  Orphah.  After  a  residence  of  ten  years,  the  two 
young  men  died  childless.  Naomi,  now  a  childless  and  forsa- 
ken widow,   intended  to  return  to  her  native  place ;  her  two 

*  Judges  x,  4  J  Numbers  xxxii,  41. 


CHAPTER    V.  233 

daughters-in-law  insisted  on  going  with  her.  An  enthusiastic 
description  of  the  helpless  condition  of  Naomi  persuaded  Or- 
phan to  stay  in  Moab,  but  Ruth  insisted  upon  remaining  with 
her  mother-in-law.  "  And  Ruth  said,  Entreat  me  not  to  leave 
thee,  or  to  return  from  following  after  thee :  for  whither  thou 
goest  I  will  go;  and  where  thou  lodgest,  1  will  lodge;  Un- 
people shall  be  my  people,  and  thy  God  my  God:  Where  thou 
diest,  will  I  die,  and  there  will  I  be  buried:  the  Lord  do  so  to 
me,  and  more  also,  if  aught  but  death  part  thee  and  me. 

Naomi  and  Ruth  came  to  Bethlehem  two  helpless  widows. 
The  piece  of  land  belonging  to  her  deceased  husband  was  sold  by 
Naomi  because  she  could  not  work  it,  and  they  were  obliged  to 
make  use  of  the  charity  laws  for  the  benefit  of  widows.  When 
the  time  of  harvest  had  come  Naomi  instructed  Ruth  to  go 
into  the  fields  of  Boaz,  who  was  a  relative  of  her  deceased 
husband,  and  glean  ears.  Boaz  on  seeing  Ruth,  and  having 
been  informed  of  her  name,  treated  her  very  kindly,  indicating 
his  affectionate  regard  for  her.  Ruth  told  her  mother-in-law 
of  the  kind  treatment  which  she  received  from  her  kinsman 
Boaz.  Naomi,  better  acquainted  with  the  mysteries  of  the 
human  heart  than  her  young  and  inexperienced  daughter-in- 
law,  persuaded  the  latter  to  inform  him,  by  a  strange  method, 
that  the  lovely  Ruth  would  not  refuse  her  hand  and  heart  to 
the  dignified  Boaz.  On  being  informed  of  this,  Boaz  adopted 
measures  to  secure  to  himself  the  fair  Ruth.  He  went  before 
the  court  of  justice,  calling  the  next  kinsman  of  Ruth,  who 
had  a  prior  right  to  redeem  the  field  and  to  take  Ruth  in  mar- 
riage, asking  of  him  to  do  so,  or  to  resign  his  rights  to 
Boaz.  The  former  resigned  his  legal  claims  in  favor  of  the 
latter,  and  Boaz  redeemed  the  field  and  took  Ruthin  marriage. 
"  So  Boaz  took  Ruth,  and  she  was  his  wife:  and  when  he  went 
in  unto  her,  the  Lord  gave  her  conception,  and  she  bare  a  son. 
And  the  women  said  unto  Naomi,  Blessed  be  the  Lord,  which 
hath  not  left  thee  this  day  without  a  kinsman,  that  his  name 
may  be  famous  in  Israel.  And  he  shall  be  unto  thee  a  restorer 
of  thy  life,  and  a  nourisher  of  thine  old  age;  for  thy  daughter- 
in-law,  which  loveth  thee,   which  is  better  to  thee  than  seven 


234  PERIOD   If. 

sons,  hath  borne  him.  And  Naomi  took  the  child,  and  laid 
it  in  her  bosom,  and  became  nurse  unto  it.  And  the  women 
her  neighbors  gave  it  a  name,  saying,  There  is  a  son  borne 
to  Naomi;  and  they  called  his  name  Obed;  he  is  the  father  of 
Jesse,  the  father  of  David.  Now  these  art  the  generations  of 
Pharez:  Pharez  begat  Hezron,  and  Hezron  begat  Ram,  and 
Ram  begat  Amminadab,  and  Amminadab  begat  Nahshon,  and 
Nahshon  begat  Salmon,  and  Salmon  begat  Boaz,  and  Boaz  be- 
gat Obed,  and  Obed  begat  Jesse,  and  Jesse  begat  David. 

The  whole  book  of  Ruth  is  written  in  such  a  pleasant  style s 
depicting  so  accurately  an  age  of  innocence,  honesty  and  aifec- 
tion,  that  its  high  antiquity  can  not  be  doubted.  It  is  remark- 
able to  us  as  forming  a  peculiar  contrast  to  the  rudeness  of 
Jephthah— not,  indeed,  to  the  loveliness  of  his  daughter,  and 
Samson ;  which  convinces  us  that  the  heroic  and  chivalric  age 
of  every  nation  produces  the  same  charming  and  attractive 
characters,  the  same  innocent  beings  and  noble  affections. 

Our  sources  mention  after  the  demise  of  Abzon  (about  1170, 
b.  a),  two  judges  after  each  other,  Elon  of  the  tribe  of  Ze- 
bulon,  and  Abdon,  son  of  Hillel,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim;  the 
former  governed  Israel  ten  years,  and  the  latter  eight  years. 
Of  the  former  no  notice  has  reached  us,  and  of  the  latter  we 
know  that  he  had  forty  sons  and  thirty  grandsons,  who  rode 
on  seventy  asses;  the  former  was  buried  in  Ajalon,  of  Zebu- 
Ion,  and  the  latter  in  Pirathon,  of  Ephraim. 

It  appears  from  Judges,  x,  7,  that  the  forty  years  of  the 
Phelistine  war  (ibid,  xiii)  commenced  previously  to  the  inva- 
sion of  the  Ammonites.  It  appears  from  the  whole  tenor  of  the 
story  of  Samson,  that  he  made  an  end  to  the  supremacy  of  the 
Phelistines,  to  which  end  also  the  beginning  of  I  Samuel  may 
safely  be  quoted,  where  we  find  no  trace  of  the  Phelistines 
during  the  administration  of  Eli.  Samson  governed  Israel 
twenty  years  during  the  supremacy  of  the  Phelistines,  conse- 
quently the  troubles  with  the  Phelistines  must  have  commenced 
as  early  as  in  the  latter  time  of  Abzon.  The  trouble  with  the 
Ammonites  lasted  eight  years  (ibid,  x,  3);  if  they  invaded 
Israel  soon  after  the  Phelistines,  that  trouble  terminated  shortly 
before  Samson  succeeded  Abdon. 


CHAPTER    V.  235 

The  story  of  those  invasions  appears  to  us  to  have  been  this : 
Israel  had  enjoyed  the  blessings  of  peace  from  the  time  of 
Gideon,  after  he  had  driven  the  Midianites  from  the  country,  to 
the  end  of  Abzon's  administration,  above  ninety  years,  inter- 
rupted only  by  the  Abimelech  revolution,  which  having  been 
limited  to  Shechem  and  Thebez  was  of  no  considerable  import* 
ance.  The  population  increased,  agriculture  flourished,  as  we 
learn  from  the  descriptions  in  the  book  of  Ruth,  the  wealth  of 
the  country  was  considerably  developed,  and  the  people  had 
preferred  the  implements  of  agriculture  to  the  instruments  of 
war.  Prosperity  and  idolatry  were  always  closely  connected 
in  Israel,  as  they  naturally  must  have  been.  The  impotence  of 
the  national  government  was  the  natural  consequence  of  idol- 
atry, which  distracted  the  union  of  Israel.  When,  therefore, 
the  neighboring  nations  were  convinced  that  a  rich  spoil  might 
be  obtained  in  Palestine,  they  were  ready  to  invade  it.  The 
Phelistines,  who  connected  commercial  causes  with  the  desire 
for  spoil,  formed  an  alliance  against  Israel  with  Ammon  and 
Moab,  with  whom  most  likely  also  other  petty  nations  were 
connected.  While  the  Phelistines  invaded  Palestine  in  the 
west,  and  more  especially  the  sea  shores  of  Dan,  which  con- 
tained the  bay  of  Joppa,  and  where  the  Danites  appear  to  have 
had  considerable  maritime  commerce  (Judges  v,  17) ;  the  Am- 
monites invaded  Gilead,  succeeded  in  crossing  the  Jordan,  and 
made  roving  incursions  in  Jehudah,  Benjamin  and  Ephraim. 
The  national  government  was  deserted,  and  consequently  had 
no  power  to  oppose  effectually  the  invaders.  While  the  tribe 
of  Dan  was  limited  to  its  own  means  of  defence,  Gilead  was  no 
less  deserted  by  the  rest  of  Israel.  But  Gilead  was  itself  a 
nation,  and  most  likely  could  reckon  upon  the  assistance  of 
numerous  Israelites  who  still  occupied  parts  of  the  desert. 
When  they  had  been  exposed  for  many  years  to  the  incursions 
of  the  Ammonites  and  their  allies,  no  arrangements  to  their 
relief  being  made  by  the  national  government ;  they  collected 
an  army  of  their  own,  declared  themselves  independent  of  the 
other  tribes,  and  promised  the  dignity  of  being  their  chief 
magistrate  to  the  man  who  would  be  their  leader  in  that  cam- 


236  PERIOD    II. 

paign  and  should  succeed  in  chastising  Amnion.  None  had  the 
courage  to  undertake  the  hazardous  enterprise.  The  rufle  and 
warlike  Jephthah  was  invited  by  the  elders  of  Gilead  to  take  the 
lead  in  that  struggle;  he  was  thought  capable  of  performing 
the  difficult  task.  Jephthah  was  the  son  of  a  man  called  Gilead 
and  of  a  lubric  woman,  wherefore  his  brothers  had  excluded 
him  from  the  family  and  their  estate ;  he  collected  around  him 
a  gang  of  adventurers  and  seized  upon  a  parcel  of  land  in  the 
land  of'Tob,*  having  already  distinguished  himself  as  a  man  of 
a  warlike  disposition  and  extraordinary  valor. 

When  the  elders  of  Gilead  had  offered  to  Jephtah  the  com- 
mand of  their  troops,  and  the  chief  dignity  in  time  of  peace, 
he  followed  them  to  Mizpah,  where  the  representatives  of  the 
people  of  Gilead  received  him  as  the  chief  of  the  land.  ISo 
time  was  to  be  lost,  for  the  Ammonites  occupied  all  the  plains 
of  Gilead,  while  the  Israelites  were  encamped  on  the  hills  in 
the  vicinity  of  Mizpah.  Operations  were  at  once  commenced, 
therefore,  by  sending  ambassadors  to  the  king  of  Amnion  (the 
first  historical  trace  of  the  law  of  nations  regarding  ambassa- 
dors), to  ascertain  the  cause  of  his  repeated  invasions  of  Gilead. 
This  informs  us,  that  it  was  not  deemed  honorable  to  commence 
hostilities  without  a  just  cause.  The  king  of  Ammon  sent 
him  word,  that  the  object  of  his  invasion  was  to  retake  the 
land  which  Israel,  when  coming  up  from  Egypt,  had  taken  from 
his  predecessor.  Jephthah  on  having  received  this  message  dis- 
patched again  his  ambassadors  with  an  accurate  statement  of 
facts  as  recorded  in  the  Pentateuch,  that  the  Israelites  had 
taken  no  land  from  the  Ammonites;  adding,  that  even  if  they 
had  done  so,  they  had  for  nearly  three  hundred  years  been  in 
possession  of  the  places  claimed  by  Amnion.  Why  did  they 
not  make  those  claims  during  that  period  ?  why  just  now  when 
he  was  called  to  govern  the  nation?  "  The  Lord  will  judge, 
who  judges  to  day  between  the  children  of  Israel,  and  the 
children  of  Ammon.-'  But  the  Ammonites  insisted  upon  their 
claims,  and  Jephthah  appealed  to  arms.    He  marched  dowu  from 

*  II  Samuel  x,  G ;  I  Chron.  xi, 


CHAPTER    V.  237 

the  north,  where  the  .army  was  concentrated,  through  the 
provinces  east  of  the  Jordan,  until  he  had  reached  the  enemy's 
camp.  Before  the  decisive  battle  commenced,  he  vowed  a  vow 
to  devote  to  the  Lord  that  which  he  should  first  meet  when  he 
reached  his  house  after  having  defeated  the  enemy.  The  attack 
was  made,  and  the  enemy  was  routed.  Jephthah  pursued  the 
retreating  enemy  and  recaptured  twenty  cities  which  were  in 
the  hands  of  the  Ammonites;  he  drove  them  from  the  country, 
and  then  returned  with  his  victorious  army;  but  having 
reached  his  residence,  his  daughter,  his  only  child,  came 
out  to  welcome  him  with  tamborine,  and  dances.  Jephthah 
tore  his  garments  in  a  state  of  despair,  telling  his  daughter 
of  his  horrible  vow;  but  she,  indicating  not  only  the  noblest 
sentiments  of  filial  submission,  but  also  a  patriotic  joy  about 
the  victory  over  the  enemy,  and  a  full  respect  to  the  word  of 
her  father,  was  willing  to  be  the  victim  of  her  father's  vow. 
She  mourned  two  months  in  company  with  her  friends,  after 
which  she  was  separated  from  the  world,  a  devotee  of  the  Lord. 
Four  times  a  year  the  daughters  of  Israel  came  to  her  to  praise 
her  for  her  noble  sentiments  of  filial  submission.  It  can  not 
be  denied,  that  our  text  gives  much  cause  to  believe  that  she 
was  indeed  sacrificed,  which  is  by  no  means  unlikely  if  the 
character  of  Jephthah  is  truly  considered.  Still  it  would  ap- 
pear to  us,  that  this  was  not  the  case,  because  Jephthah  had 
reason  enough  for  not  doing  it,  it  being  against  the  laws  of  the 
land,  which  advantage  was  certainly  welcome  to  him.  Still  the 
vow  itself  is  a  proof  of  his  rudeness  and  inconsideration. 

The  men  of  Ephraim  complained  against  Jephthah  for  not 
having  called  on  them  to  assist  in  the  last  war,  threatening 
to  set  his  house  on  fire.  If  we  have  set  the  story  of  Jephthah 
in  the  right  time,  as  not  only  mrcumstances  but  also  the  three 
hundred  years  mentioned  by  him  confirm,  then  Abdon,  the  son 
of  Hillel,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  was  the  judge  of  Israel. 
The  sons  of  Ephraim  defended  the  national  government  against 
the  usurpation  of  Jephthah,  because  the  judge  was  a  son 
of  their  tribe.  No  blame  could  be  attached  to  Jephthah  for 
having  delivered  the  country  from  the   hands   of  the  enemy. 


238  PERIOD    II. 

They  could  but  blame  him,  that  he  did  so  ou  his  own  account 
without  summoning  the  other  tribes  in  a  legal  way.  Jephthah 
justified  the  course  which  he  had  taken  by  the  fact,  that  the 
invasions  of  Amnion  were  repeated  frequently;  that  his  people 
had  called  on  the  nation  for  help;  but  were  not  heard.  There- 
fore they  acted  on  their  own  accord,  appointing  him  their  com- 
mander-in-chief. 

This  interchange  of  accusations  and  justifications  ended  in 
a  civil  war.  The  sons  of  Ephraim  crossed  the  Jordan  with  a 
considerable  force.  Jephthah  had  an  experienced  army,  and  the 
sons  of  Ephraim,  or  rather  the  army  of  the  national  gov- 
ernment, was  routed  and  dispersed.  The  retreating  war- 
riors were  caught  and  killed  at  the  fords  of  Jordan,  so  that 
forty-two  thousand  of  them  fell  in  that  engagement.  Pru- 
dence would  have  dictated  a  different  course  of  action  under 
the  existing  circumstances.  Moderation  on  the  side  of  the 
national  government  would  have  been  the  best  policy.  The 
forty-two  thousand  warriors  who  fell  in  the  civil  war,  if 
assisted  by  Jephthah  and  his  trained  troops,  might  have  saved 
the  country  from  the  Phelistines;  and  it  could  not  be  alleged, 
that  Jephthah  or  the  people  of  Gilead  were  altogether  in  the 
wrong.  A  government  which  has  lost  the  capability  to  protect 
the  country  has  ceased  to  exist,  de  facto  and  de  jure. 

Jephthah  enjoyed  the  fruits  of  his  victory  only  six  years,  in- 
cluding probably  the  campaign,  after  which  he  died,  and  was 
buried  in  Gilead. 

While  the  Ammonites  thus  molested  the  people  beyond  Jor- 
dan, the  Phelistines  made  great  progress  in  the  west.  The 
country  of  that  people  reached  from  the  Nahr  Rubin  to  the 
sandy  desert  which  separates  Egypt  from  Palestine,  along  the 
shores  of  the  Mediterranean,  not  extending  more  than  twenty 
to  twenty-five  miles  into  the  interior.  They  were  in  posses- 
sion of  five  principal  cities,  Gath,Ekron,  Ashdod,  Ascalon  and 
Gaza;  to  each  of  which  was  attached  a  small  district  of  land. 
Every  city  had  a  chief,  called  seren;  the  title  of  Abimelech, 
still  in  use  in  the  time  of  Isaac,  was  abolished  most  likely  by 
the  Anakims,  who  were  ever  after  their  emigration  the  ruling 


CHAPTER   V.  239 

caste  of  Phelistia.  It  appears,  that  Phelistia  had  sent  many 
colonies  to  foreign  countries,  by  which  they  became  a  commer- 
cial people,  as  formerly  the  aborigines  were.  The  five  chiefs 
of  the  cities  of  Phelistia  were  united,  at  least  in  their  war- 
like expeditions  against  Israel,  which  were  carried  on  with 
some  intervals  of  peace  for  more  than  a  century,  for  two  pur- 
poses: to  gain  possession  of  the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean, 
and  to  have  a  highway  through  Palestine  to  the  interior  of 
Asia,  both  of  which  were  of  no  small  importance  to  the  Phelis- 
tines.  The  national  government  of  Israel  offered  no  effectual 
resistance  to  the  Phelistines;  and  Dan,  probably  assisted  by 
Ephraim  and  Jehudah,  were  obliged  to  fight  for  their  own 
defence. 

The  Phelistines  had  met  with  much  success  before  Samson 
was  born,  who  was  purposely  educated  by  his  mother  to  redeem 
Israel  from  the  Phelistines;  because  she  knew  by  the  message 
of  an  angel,  her  patriotic  sentiments,  that  this  would  be 
the  vocation  of  her  son.  The  Hercules  of  the  Israelites,  who 
was  a  contemporary  of  the  Greek  Hercules,*  was  educated  as 
a  nazir  by  his  father,  Manoah,  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  and  most 
likely  was  trained  in  arms  and  gymnastical  practices  from  his 
early  youth.  Samson  soon  manifested  gigantic  strength  and  a 
warlike  disposition;  when  still  j'oung  he  distinguished  him- 
self in  a  battle  against  the  Phelistines  between  Zereah  and 
Eshtael,  in  the  camp  and  territory  of  Dan  (Judges  xiii,  25). 
Having  seen  a  woman  in  Thimnah  of  Dan,  where  the  Phelis- 
tines had  a  settlement,  she  being  a  Phelistine,  Samson  desired 
his  parent  to  obtain  her  for  him,  as  our  sources  inform  us,  in 
order  to  have  a  pretext  of  hostility  against  that  settlement  in 
case  the  woman  should  be  refused  him.  His  parents  consented, 
and  when  on  the  way  to  Thimnah  he  killed  a  lion.  When  he 
was  in  the  house  of  his  father-in-law  celebrating  his  marriage 
day,  Samson  gave  a  riddle  to  the  guests  for  the  solution  of 
which  thirty  suits  of  clothes  should  be  paid.     The  Phelistines 

*  It  is  an  unquestionable  fact,  that  nature  produces  in  almost  every  century 
some  giants,  either  physical  or  mental,  and  that  some  centuries  in  history  are 
especially   productive  of  such  uncommon  phenomena. 


240  PERIOD  II. 

could  not  solve  it,  which  was  then  taken  for  national  inferi- 
ority in  respect  to  wit.  They  obtained  the  solution  of  the 
riddle  from  Samson  through  the  agency  of  his  wife,  and  he  was 
obliged  to  pay  the  wager;  whereupon  he  went  down  towards 
Ashcalon,  killed  thirteen  of  the  enemy,  most  likely  in  an 
engagement  of  a  small  detachment  of  his  troops  with  those 
of  the  Phelistines,  took  the  clothes  and  paid  the  wager. 

During  his  absence,  his  father-in-law  gave  the  young  wife  of 
Samson  to  another  man.  When  Samson  was  informed  of  it,  he 
said,  "Now  I  am  innocent  as  to  the  Phelistines  if  I  do  them 
evil;"  then  proceeding  to  their  territory,  certainly  not  without 
a  strong  body  of  warriors,  he  set  their  grains  and  trees  on  fire 
by  a  peculiar  contrivance  of  his  own.  The  Phelistines.  byway 
of  retaliation,  burnt  his  supposed  wife  and  father-in-law.  For 
this  Samson  paid  them  with  another  bold  incursion,  ';And  he 
smote  them  hip  and  thigh  with  a  great  slaughter,  and  he  went 
down  and  dwelt  on  the  top  of  the  rock  Etam."  The  last  part 
of  this  verse  plainly  says,  that  those  incursions  and  smaller 
actions  were  of  no  effect;  the  Phelistines  were  not  beaten,  they 
were  only  enraged,  and  Samson  was  obliged  to  occupy  a  strong 
place,  where  he  could  protect  himself  and  his  men;  leaving 
the  country  no  less  exposed  than  before  to  the  incursions  of  the 
enemy.  The  Phelistines  thought  of  making  at  once  an  end  to 
the  dangerous  and  troublesome  Samson;  they  sent  a  considerable 
army  into  Jehudah  to  bring  him  ;  the  people  of  Jehudah 
were  willing  to  deliver  him  up  to  his  enemies,  and  he  himself 
made  but  one  condition,  which  was  that  the  people  of  Jehudah 
should  not  fight  against  him.  He  descended  from  the  rock, 
accompanied  by  his  brave  band,  using  the  stratagem  of  having 
his  hands  bound  as  a  captive,  in  order  to  be  permitted  to  come 
near  enough  to  the  camp  of  the  Phelistines  without  the  latter 
suspecting  an  assault.  When  he  was  near  enough,  and  the 
Phelistines,  not  suspecting  an  attack,  indicated  by  their  shouts 
of  joy,  that  they  actually  supposed  him  their  prisoner,  he  broke 
the  ties  from  his  hands,  and  rushed  upon  them  with  the  fury  of 
a  lion.  The  people  of  Jehudah  and  his  own  band  certainly 
followed  his  courageous   example,  and    the  Phelistines  were 


CHAPTER    V.  241 

defeated,  leaving  the  battle-field  in  disorder,  which  was  covered 
with  one  thousand  of  them.  The  name  of  the:  place,  Lehi 
(jawbone),  and  the  well,  En  Eakora  (well  of  the  crier),  of 
which  Samson  may  have  drunk  when  exhausted  by  the  hot 
engagement,  gave  rise  to  the  fabulous  tint  of  the  story. 

It  appears  that  Samson  was  a  mere  youth  when  performing 
those  valorous  deeds;  he  attracted  public  notice  and  was 
thought  to  be  the  man  who  would  save  the  country  from  the 
hands  of  the  Phelistines.  Therefore,  when  Abdon  died,  Samson 
was  appointed  chief  magistrate  in  his  place  (about  1152  b.  c), 
which  office  he  maintained  twenty  years.  The  fame  of  Samson 
united  the  warriors  under  his  banner.  The  war  was  continued 
almost  during  the  whole  of  the  administration  of  Samson 
{Judges  xv,  20),  but  no  account  of  the  expeditions  has  reached 
us.  The  stories  narrated  of  Samson  in  the  sixteenth  chapter 
of  Judges,  are  a  plain  evidence  that  the  Phelistines  were 
utterly  discomfited  towards  the  close  of  his  administration. 

Samson  could  go  freely  to  Gaza;  being  there,  on  one  occa- 
sion, paying  a  visit  to  a  lubric  woman  in  whose  house  he 
remained  all  night,  the  Phelistines  determined  upon  assassinat- 
ing him;  but  although  they  surrounded  the  house  all  night,  still 
they  had  not  the  boldness  to  attack  him.  Samson,  on  having 
learned  their  design,  secretly  left  the  house  with  his  com- 
panions, and  breaking  the  gate  of  Gaza,  he  and  his  companions 
took  gate,  bars  and  posts,  and  deposited  them  on  an  eminence 
in  the  vicinity  of  Hebron,  as  a  token  of  the  cowardice  of  the 
Phelistines. 

Samson  subsequently  formed  an  attachment  for  a  woman, 
Delilah,  of  the  Phelistines,  residing  in  Nahal  Shorek,  and  was 
not  afraid  to  pay  her  visits  at  any  place  in  the  enemy's  terri- 
tory; we  are  left  to  conjecture  that  he  always  was  accompanied 
by  a  chosen  band  of  warriors.  "When  the  Phelistines  had  learned 
his  inclination  to  Delilah,  they  promised  her  a  large  sum  of 
money  if  she  would  contrive  to  deliver  Samson  into  their  hands ; 
the  treacherous,  or  probably,  patriotic  woman,  several  times 
succeeded  in  bringing  him  to  places  where  armed  forces  of  the 
Phelistines  were  ready  to  take  him  prisoner.  Still,  the  personal 
16 


242  PERIOD    II. 

valor  of  Samson  and  his  companions  always  frustrated  their 
design,  and  they  were  several  times  beaten  in  their  own 
country.  These  adventures  made  him  bold,  and  he  looked 
upon  the  Phelistines  with  a  certain  degree  of  contempt.  He 
went  to  see  Delilah  wherever  she  chose  to  see  him.  She  once 
beguiled  him  to  meet  her  at  a  place,  where  an  adequate  force  of 
the  Phelistines  was  secretly  collected.  She  most  likely  suc- 
ceeded in  separating  him  from  his  companions  at  arms;  and 
when  intoxicated  by  the  embraces  of  love,  he  had  fallen  fast 
asleep,  the  Phelistines  surprised  him,  blinded  both  his  eyes, 
which  at  once  made  him  unable  to  defend  himself,  and  thus 
they  succeeded  in  binding  him,  and  conveyed  him  in  chains  to 
the  prison  at  Gaza.  His  companions  most  likely  were  mas- 
sacred, and  the  lion-like  hero  was  lying  in  chains  blind  and 
miserable.  His  luxuriant  hair,  the  best  token  of  physical 
strength,  which  he  wore  because  being  a  nazir,  gave  birth  to 
the  fabulous  character  of  the  story  in  regard  to  his  hair. 

The  Phelistines  rejoiced  to  have  in  their  power  their  most 
formidable  enemy;  a  general  feast  was  celebrated  to  praise 
Dagon  for  having  delivered  him  into  their  hands.  The  blind 
hero  was  brought  before  the  feasting  multitude,  to  be  the  aim 
of  their  wit;  he  was  posted  between  the  two  middle  pillars, 
upon  which  the  roof  with  the  galleries  rested  most  heavily. 
Around  him  stood  the  princes  and  officers  of  Phelistia,  together 
with  three  thousand  spectators,  mocking  and  scoffing  at  the 
chained  lion,  which  enraged  him  to  fury.  His  leaders  having 
allowed  him  by  his  request  the  free  use  of  his  hands,  he 
clinched  his  arms  around  the  pillars,  between  which  he  stood, 
and  exclaimed  furiously,  "Now  I  will  die  with  the  Phelistines," 
he  broke  the  pillars ;  the  roof  and  the  galleries  fell  down  and 
buried  under  their  ruins  the  whole  assembly  and  also  Samson. 
(1132  b.  c.)     Thus  a  hero  died. 

Samson  had  severely  chastised  the  Phelistines.  The  Israelites 
were  not  troubled  for  about  forty  years.  The  tragical  end  and  the 
heroic  deeds  of  Samson,  especially  as  he  was  the  savior  of  his 
country,  left  a  lasting  impression  on  the  heart  of  every  patriot, 
and  the  myths  could  not  fail  in  an  age  of  poetry  and  imagina- 


CHAPTER    VI.  243 

tion.  It  may  be  taken  as  a  proof,  that  the  Israelites  were  not 
as  much  inclined  to  paganism  as  it  is  generally  supposed  they 
were;  if  so  they  would  have  deified  him  as  the  heathens  did 
with  their  heroes. 

The  brothers  of  Samson,  and  the  whole  house  of  his  father, 
went  down  to  Gaza  to  bring  up  his  remains.  The  panic  of  the 
Phelistines  must  have  been  great,  that  they  suffered  the  Israel- 
ites to  come  into  their  country  and  take  these  remains.  He 
was  buried  between  Zareah  and  Eshtael  in  the  sepulchre  of  his 
father,  where  he  first  fought  the  enemy. 


CHAPTER   VI. 

FROM    THE    DEMISE    OF    SAMSON   TO    THE    END    OF   THE 
REPUBLIC  (1132— 10S0,  b.  c.). 

After  Samson  was  gathered  in  to  his  people,  Eli,  the  high 
priest,  a  descendant  of  Aaron  by  Ithamar,  succeeded  the 
former  in  the  highest  office  of  the  nation.  No  chief  magistrate 
had  yet  been  elected  from  the  tribe  of  Levi  since  the  days  of 
Moses.  This  proves  that  the  national  sanctuary  at  Shiloh 
must  have  been  held  in  high  estimation  by  the  people,  as  its 
highest  officer  was  appointed  to  the  highest  political  dignity  in 
the  gift  of  the  people. 

We  have  no  history  of  Eli,  Samuel,  or  Saul;  the  royal  and 
Davidian  author  of  that  book  gave  but  a  short  sketch  of  those 
three  distinguished  personages,  treating  their  history  as  a 
mere  introduction  to  the  history  of  David. 

Eli  was  fifty-eight  years  old  when  he  was  appointed  chief 
magistrate;  he  occupied  a  lofty  position  in  the  estimation  of 
the  people,  and  maintained  peace  and  good  order  throughout 
the  country.  When  Eli  grew  old,  so  that  he  could  scarcely 
see  any  more,  his  two  sons  officiated  in  the  tabernacle  (not  as 


244  PERIOD    II. 

high  priests),  holding  high  offices.  They  were  very  licentious 
and  frivolous,  and  paid  not  the  slightest  respect  to  female 
chastity  and  the  national  sanctuary.  Eli  was  informed  of  the 
demeanor  of  his  sons,  and  he  exhorted  them  most  solemnly, 
but  it  was  in  vain;  they  continued  in  their  wickedness  so  that 
they  were  declared  unqualified  to  succeed  their  father  in  his 
clerical  dignity.  This  declaration,  of  course,  came  from  the 
national  council  (I  Samuel,  ii,  27-37),  and  fell  heavily  upon 
the  aged  Eli.  Samuel,  too,  of  whom  we  shall  speak  hereafter, 
who  had  become  a  popular  and  inspired  speaker,  so  that  he  had 
already  acquired  the  public  fame  of  a  prophet,  brought  the 
same  message  to  Eli.  In  consideration  of  Eli's  inability  to 
govern  the  nation,  because  of  his  advanced  age,  and  perceiving 
the  warlike  preparations  and  most  likely  the  hostile  incursions 
of  the  Phelistines,  Samuel  predicted  great  misfortune  to  Israel. 
It  appears  that  the  bold  words  of  Samuel  aroused  Eli  and  the 
Israelites  from  a  state  of  lethargy  in  which  they  appear  to 
have  been  sunk,  so  that  an  army  was  collected  in  haste  to 
prevent  a  surprise  by  the  Phelistines.  But  as  soon  as  an  army 
had  been  brought  together  at  Mizpah,  the  Phelistines  came 
through  Dan  with  a  large  army.  They  were  encamped  at 
Aphek,  and  the  Israelites  encamped  at  a  place  near  Mizpah, 
afterwards  called  Eben  Haezer  (I  Samuel,  vii,  12).  The  Phe- 
listines attacked  and  defeated  the  Israelites  in  a  pitched  battle, 
so  that  the  latter  left  the  field  with  a  heavy  loss,  amounting  to 
four  thousand.  The  Israelites  held  a  counsel  of  war  in  the 
camp  to  devise  means  for  procuring  a  victory ;  it  was  finally 
determined  that  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  together  with  the 
officiating  priests,  should  be  brought  into  the  camp  to  en- 
courage the  warriors. 

Messengers  were  dispatched  to  Shiloh,  who  returned  with 
the  ark  and  the  officiating  priests,  among  whom  were  Hophni 
and  Phineas,  the  two  sons  of  Eli.  When  the  ark  was  brought 
into  the  camp,  the  Israelites  shouted  and  blew  their  trumpets, 
so  that  the  noise  was  heard  in  the  camp  of  the  Phelistines,  who 
were,  it  was  thought,  greatly  frightened  by  the  arrival  of  the 
Israelitish  gods  in  the    camp.     The   result,  however,    proved 


CHAPTEB    VI.  245 

the  contrary  to  the  expectation.      It  appears  that  the   Phelis- 
tines,    taking    advantage  of  the   moment    when    the  Israelites 
shoutingly  greeted  the  arrival  of  the  ark,  made  an  unexpected 
attack  upon  them,   and  besides  defeating  them  on  all  points, 
they  also  captured  the  ark,  which  was  at  once  sent  as  a  host- 
age into  the  interior  of  Phelistia,    to  Ashdod.     The  field  was 
covered    with    30,000    slain    Israelites,    among    whom    were 
Hophni  and  Phineas,  the  two  sons  of  Eli;  part  of  the  Israelites 
fled  to  their  own  tents,  while  the  principal  number  of  warriors 
appear  to  have  sought  refuge  behind  the  walls  of  Mizpah;  to 
which   place    the    people,    roused   to    action    by  the   inspired 
speeches   of  Samuel,  flocked  from  all  parts  of  the    country. 
Samuel,  as  we  have  noticed  before,  had  predicted  the  invasion 
before  its  actual  commencement,  and  he  succeeded  in  rousing 
Eli  and  the  Israelites  from  their  state  of  lethargy.     It  appears 
(I  Samuel,   ii,    1)  that  Samuel  increased  his  activity  as  the 
danger  of  the  invasion  increased,  and  he  succeeded  in  collecting 
a  second  army  at  Mizpah,   to  join  the  wrecks  of  the  defeated 
one.     He  exhorted  the  people  at  Mizpah  on  account  of  their 
disunion,  which  he  justly  ascribed  to  their  inclination  to  serve 
idols  and  to  desert  God  and  his  laws.     He  convinced  them  that 
they,  if  united,  were  mighty  enough  to  chastise  the  Phelistines 
and  to  drive  the  invaders  from  the  country.     Samuel  succeeded 
in  encouraging  and  reorganizing  the  army.     After  they  had 
signified  their  reunion  by  divine  service,  they  went  to  meet  the 
enemy,   who  had  meanwhile  came  up   to  Mizpah,  and,  as  it 
appears  from  our  records,   assaulted  the  city.     The   Israelites 
not  only  defended  the  city,  but  also  attacked  the  enemy  in  the 
open  field  and  routed  them  on  all  points.     The  Phelistines  fled; 
the  Israelites  pursued  them  as  far  as  Beth  Chor.    Samuel  erected 
a  monument  near   Mizpah,   at  the  spot  where    the  victory  was 
achieved,    and  called  it  Eben  ha-Ezor  (stone  of  help).     The 
Israelites  pursued  their  victory;  they  retook  all  the  places  be- 
tween Ekron  and  Gath,  which  were  in  possession  of  the  Phelis- 
tines, who  were  so  discomlitted  that  they  had  not  the  power  for 
the  next  following  quarter  of  a  century  to  disturb  the  peace  of 
the  Israelites.    It  appears  that  a  formal  peace  was  made  between 


246  PERIOD    II. 

the  hostile  parties,  because  the  Israelites  could  have  then  over- 
run  the  whole  country  of  the  Phelistincs,  without  any  great 
exertion,  which  they  imprudently  omitted  to  do.  The  return 
of  the  ark  and  a  heavy  restitution  and  indemnification  in  gold, 
seem  to  have  been  the  conditions  which  the  Phelistines  fulfilled. 
The  places  mentioned  in  the  sacred  records,  where  so  many 
were  ill  with  secret  diseases  on  account  of  the  ark,  seem  to  be 
an  emblematical  representation  of  the  panic  with  which  the 
Phelistines  looked  upon  the  progress  of  the  Israelitish  arms. 
The  Israelites,  in  order  to  recover  the  ark,  agreed,  against  all 
rules  of  sound  policy,  to  terms  of  peace,  granting  to  the  Phe- 
listines many  advantages.  The  account  of  the  many  deaths 
which  occurred  in  Beth  Shemesh  on  account  of  one  looking 
into  the  ark,  while  the  inhabitants  sacrificed  burnt-offerings 
and  peace-offerings,  appears  to  us  to  indicate  a  revolt  which 
broke  out  among  the  Israelites  on  account  of  the  peace,  which 
was  concluded  by  pious  but  imprudent  motives,  and  which  cost 
seventy  lives,  which  were  destroyed  by  the  fifty  thousand  men 
happening  to  be  assembled  there.  The  people  of  Kiriath  Jearim, 
who  seem  to  have  been  especially  in  favor  of  the  treaty  of 
peace,  were  rewarded  by  having  the  ark  in  their  midst,  which 
was  deposited  in  the  house  of  Abinadab,  located  on  a  hill, 
and  his  son  Elasar  was  appointed  to  watch  over  it.  It  appears 
from  this,  that  the  war  lasted  seven  months  from  the  day  when 
the  ark  was  captured  (I  Samuel  vi,  1).  When  the  war  was 
ended,  it  was  natural  that  Samuel,  who  had  saved  the  com- 
monwealth by  his  active  exertions,  was  appointed  chief  magis- 
trate in  the  place  of  Eli,  who  on  hearing  the  account  of  the 
loss  in  the  battle,  of  the  defeat  of  the  army,  of  the  death  of 
his  sons,  and  of  the  capture  of  the  ark,  fell  fainting  from  his 
chair  and  died  in  consequence  of  the  fail  (about  1092,  b.  c). 
His  daughter-in-law,  the  wife  of  Phineas,  died,  while  giving 
early  birth  to  a  boy  whom  she  called  Ee-Kabod  (the  glory  is 
gone  from  Israel). 

The  story  of  the  birth  of  Samuel,  however  interesting,  is 
not  a  part  of  history;  we  are  interested  in  the  mere  fact,  that 
Samuel  was  educated  under  the  superintendence  of  Eli;  that  he 


CHAPTER    VI.  247 

was  already  among  the  watch  of  the  Levites  in  the  sanctuary, 
previous  to  the  outbreak  of  the  war,  consequently,  he  must  have 
been  at  least  twenty-five  years  of  age.  The  war  may  have 
lasted  one  year,  consequently,  Samuel  was  of  a  mature  age 
when  he  was  appointed  chief  magistrate  of  the  nation.  He  can 
not  have  been  very  old,  as  he  was  called  naar,  a  youth,  when 
predicting  the  forthcoming  misfortune. 

Samuel  was  a  Levite  of  the  family  of  Kehath  (I  Chron.  iv, 
7-13);  his  father  lived  in  Ramah  (Ramath  or  Arimathaea),  in 
the  province  of  Benjamin  on  Mount  Ephraim,  where  also 
Samuel  made  his  residence.  It  can  not  be  denied,  that  in  a 
republic  it  frequently  occurs  that  men  are  called  to  preside 
over  the  nation,  not  on  account  of  their  capability  for  the 
office,  but  on  account  of  other  personal  qualities  or  political 
reasons.  This  may  be  of  no  great  disadvantage  in  a  country 
where  every  man  of  education  is  acquainted  with  the  laws  and 
institutions  of  the  land;  but  this  was  not  the  case  among 
Israel,  where,  most  likely,  in  that  age,  but  a  small  portion  of  the 
nation  had  much  knowledge  of  the  laws  and  institutions  of 
the  nation.  The  majority  of  the  judges  were  appointed  to 
their  position  on  account  of  their  military  valor,  as  was  the 
case  with  Gideon,  Jephthah,  Samson,  and  others,  which  circum- 
stance certainly  exercised  an  unfavorable  influence  upon  the 
development  of  the  nation.  Eli  was  a  man  of  peace ;  he  main- 
tained the  peace  of  the  country  for  forty  years;  the  land 
flourished,  its  wealth  increased,  and  lethargy  followed  as  it 
usually  does. 

In  time  of  peace  there  is  a  favorable  opportunity  for  internal 
improvements,  for  the  cultivation  of  science  and  arts.  It  is 
therefore  plain,  that  civilization  made  a  material  advance 
among  the  Israelites  during  the  administration  of  Eli.  Thus 
not  only  was  the  field  prepared  for  the  benevolent  activity  of 
Samuel,  but  Samuel  himself  was  educated  for  his  mission  under 
the  superintendence  of  Eli,  who  loved  the  talented  and  ardent 
youth;  in  the  midst  of  profound  peace  and  general  prosperity; 
on  the  side  of  the  political  men  who  assembled  at  Shiloh,  to 
hold   their  three-annual  sessions;    at  the  very  centre  of  the 


248  PERIOD    II. 

nation,  where  the  people — at  least,  the  better  portion — assem- 
bled three  times  a  year.  Samuel  was  educated  for  his  omce 
under  favorable  circumstances,  wherefore  he  administrated  the 
laws  with  skill  and  energy,  so  that  he  may  be  called  very 
justly  a  second  Moses,  which  was  actually  done  by  the  ancients, 
as  far  as  the  administration  is  concerned  (Psalm  xcix,  6). 

A  long  period  of  peace  and  national  prosperity  is  frequently 
productive  of  demoralization,  as  we  have  noticed  frequently  in 
this  period  of  history.  The  wickedness  of  Hophni  and  Phineas, 
and  again  the  practice  of  idolatry  to  which  Samuel  referred 
the  misfortunes  of  the  nation,  prove  that  there  was  a  con- 
siderable demoralization  towards  the  end  of  the  Eli  adminis- 
tration. The  war  with  the  Phelistines,  as  war  in  general,  if  it 
lasts  not  too  long,  was  a  beneficent  shock,  which  at  once 
crushed  lethargy  and  demoralization,  and  roused  the  energies 
of  the  people ;  so  that  the  nation  after  a  long  period  of  peace 
was  electrified  and  regenerated,  which  made  them  susceptible 
of  a  sound  progress  of  civilization.  We  may,  therefore,  say, 
circumstances  were  favorable  to  Samuel,  and  he  was  the  man 
to  make  good  use  of  them.  Samuel  held  annually  three 
sessions  of  the  national  council  in  three  different  places ;  in 
Gilgal,  most  likely  during  the  passah-feast,  because  the  Israel- 
ites celebrated  there  the  first  passah-feast  within  their  land;  in 
Bethel,  the  classical  spot,  where  Jacob  was  promised  the  land 
of  Canaan,  near  which  Abraham  had  pitched  his  tent,  and 
Joshua  had  read  the  law.  He  held  the  meeting  most  likely 
during  the  feast  of  booths,  as  that  place  is  first  mentioned  in 
the  record,  and  the  civil  year  of  the  Israelites  commenced  but 
two  weeks  before  this  feast;  most  likely  the  feast  which  Joshua 
celebrated  there  was  also  the  feast  of  booths;  the  third  meet- 
ing he  held  in  Mizpah,  commencing  at  the  feast  of  weeks,  most 
likely  in  remembrance  of  the  victory  achieved  over  the  Phelis- 
tines. He  held  a  perpetual  court  at  his  residence  Ramah,  in 
the  part  of  Benjamin. 

This  revolution  accomplished  by  Samuel,  is  important  in 
more  than  one  respect.  He  moved  the  seat  of  government  from 
Ephraim,  in  whose  part  Shiloh  was,  on  account  of  their  assumed 


CHAPTER   VI.  249 

preponderance  over  the  other  tribes,  which  they  indicated  on 
many  occasions,  and  which  was  injurious  to  the  unity  and 
liberty  of  the  nation.  It  is  most  likely,  that  the  national 
sanctuary  was  moved  in  connection  with  the  national  council, 
so  that  the  pride  of  Shiloh  expired;  the  change  being  necessary 
on  account  of  the  moral  debasement  that  seems  to  have  dis- 
graced the  old  capital  (Psalms  lxxviii,  CO,  07).  Still,  he  held 
one  session  every  year  in  Beth  El,  which  belonged  to  Ephraim. 
The  idea  of  moving  the  national  council  and  sanctuary  was 
agreeable  to  the  federal  constitution  of  the  country,  and  calcu- 
lated to  prevent  for  the  future  the  concentration  of  power  in 
one  place  or  tribe.  If  we  are  right  in  assuming  that  Samuel 
moved  the  national  sanctuary  from  Shiloh,  then  it  was  under 
the  administration  of  Samuel  that  the  idol  of  Micah  in  the  city 
of  Dan  was  discovered  and  removed  (Judges  xviii,  31).  As 
that  place  was  at  the  extreme  north  of  the  country,  this  fact 
shows  us  that  the  reforms  of  Samuel  wrere  more  thorough  than 
those  of  any  one  judge  before  him,  and  that  he  succeeded  in 
erTecting  a  perfect  union  of  the  nation  in  religion,  and  conse- 
quently also  in  politics.  According  to  a  statement  of  the 
author  of  Samuel,  the  ark  remained  a£  Kiriath  Jearim  (I  Sam. 
vi,  3).  This  was  not  agreeable  to  the  Mosaic  ideas,  but  it  was 
not  contrary  to  the  law,  as  some  writers  supposed,  nor  was  it 
contrary  to  custom,  it  being  recorded  that  even  in  the  time  of 
the  high  priest  Phineas,  who  was  an  immediate  disciple  of 
Moses,  the  ark  was  brought  to  Beth  El  (Judges  xx,  27),  having 
been  first  brought  to  Mizpah  (verse  1),  while  the  feasts  of  the 
Lord  were  celebrated  in  Shiloh  (Judges  xxi,  19);  still,  we  sub- 
sequently find  the  ark  again  in  Shiloh  (I  Samuel  iv,  4).  It  is 
therefore  plain,  that  the  ark  had  no  necessary  connection  with 
the  national  sanctuary,  being  more  commonly  destined  by  cus- 
tom to  move  with  the  army.  Some  later  writers  have  supposed 
that  there  were  two  arks,  in  one  being  deposited  the  tables 
which  Moses  had  broken,  while  in  the  other  were  the  second 
tables  brought  by  Moses  from  Sinai.  But  we  do  not  see  the 
necessity  of  this  unfounded  supposition,  which  is  not  supported 
by  any  one   fact,  mentioned  in  the  records;  it  may  be,  that 


259  PERIOD    II. 

Gibeon  and  Kiriath  Jearim  are  identical.  The  policy  of 
Samuel  in  leaving  the  ark  where  it  chanced  to  be,  was  to  pre- 
vent domestic  trouble,  which,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  really 
took  place  when  David  attempted  to  move  the  ark  from  the 
house  of  Abinadab.  The  most  important  event  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  Samuel  is,  that  he  held  a  perpetual  court  at  Raman. 
The  former  judges  were  in  authority  only  as  long  as  the  national 
council  was  in  session,  which  in  times  of  peace  may  have  been 
for  a  few  weeks  annually,  as  the  Mosaic  law  contains  no  pro- 
vision for  the  length  of  the  sessions,  and  if  the  people  were 
addicted  to  idolatry  they  did  not  meet  at  all.  The  nassis  of 
the  respective  tribes  were  the  almost  independent  rulers  for  the 
greatest  part  of  the  year,  which  was  not  only  a  cause  of  dis- 
union and  weakness  of  the  national  government,  but  was  also 
dangerous  to  the  liberties  of  the  people.  Samuel  held  a  per- 
petual court — assisted  probably  by  a  select  number  of  the 
national  council,  or  by  the  whole  of  the  senate — to  administer 
the  laws,  and  to  secure  the  interests  of  the  confederacy.  This 
measure  enabled  him  to  secure  to  the  nation  peace  at  home  and 
abroad,  and  to  carry  out  his  reform  measures  all  over  the 
country.  • 

There  was  a  tradition  among  the  ancient  Israelites,  that 
Samuel  founded  a  high  school  at  Ramah,  the  pupils  of  which 
institute  were  called  bene  nebiim,  pupils  of  the  prophets,  or 
young  prophets.  There  are  a  great  many  reasons  for  believing 
that  this  tradition  is  founded  upon  fact.  History  mentions 
but  a  few  prophets  before  the  days  of  Samuel. 

During  the  latter  days  of  Samuel,  and  after  his  demise,  we 
meet  with  choruses  of  prophets,  hosts  of  prophets,  and  sons  of 
prophets.  Besides  this,  it  must  be  remarked,  that  the  prophets 
follow  after  Samuel  in  regular  succession,  so  that  some  prom- 
inent prophet  is  mentioned  in  every  age.  There  can  be  no 
doubt,  that  the  prophetic  era  commenced  with  Samuel,  and  if 
it  be  once  admitted,  that  there  must  have  been  a  cause  for  this 
phenomenon,  and  that  great  men  must  receive  their  education 
somewhere,  there  will  be  no  difficulty  in  believing  the  tradition, 
that  such  an  institute  was  established  by  Samuel.     Hence  it 


CHAPTER    VI.  251 

must  be  observed,  that  with  Samuel  commenced  an  era  of 
poetry  and  music,  and  many  of  the  psalms  of  David,  which 
that  bard  of  Israel  wrote  in  his  youth,  were  written  in  the 
lifetime  of  Samuel.  There  is  not  only  eminent  luxury  in  the 
language  of  the  Psalmist,  but  there  is  knowledge  and  gram- 
matical correctness  in  it,  which  must  lead  us  to  believe  that 
a  scholastic  education  must  have  existed;  without  it  the 
language  could  not  have  reached  that  degree  of  perfection,  nor 
could  such  a  profound  knowledge  of  nature,  as  indicated  in  the 
Psalms,  have  existed.  The  first  products  of  that  school  are  the 
best  information  on  the  course  of  studies  which  was  pursued  in 
that  institute.  Music,  poetry,  song,  natural  philosophy,  the 
law,  the  elements  of  rhetoric,  and  the  divine  service,  most 
likely,  comprehended  the  whole  course  of  studies  destined  for 
priests,  LeVites,  and  others  who  were  desirous  to  improve  their 
minds.  'The  traditional  accounts  perfectly  agree  with  this 
statement;  Jonathan  Ben  Uziel,  who  wrote  aversion  of  the 
prophetical  books  about  fifty  years  before  Josephus  flourished, 
calls  the  pupils  of  that  school,  saphraia,  the  scribes,  or  the 
learned,  the  doctors  of  the  law,  as  Ezra  and  the  scholars  sub- 
sequent to  Ezra  were  then  called,  which  would  also  show  that 
writing  was  one  of  the  principal  branches  of  the  school.  The 
above  mentioned  ancient  authority  also  informs  us,  that  they 
did  not  prophesy,  as  the  biblical  term  nibbehim  (I  Samuel  xix, 
20)  is  erroneously  rendered,  but  that  they  praised  the  Lord. 
That  Samuel  was  their  teacher,  and  that  a  house  on  a  height 
near  Ramah,  called  Nayoth  (a  log  house,  a  hut)  was  devoted  to 
the  purposes  of  instruction.  It  is  evident  from  I  Samuel  (xix, 
24),  that  the  pupils  of  that  institute  wore  peculiar  garments,  and 
the  name  of  the  building  strongly  indicates  not  only  a  simplicity 
beyond  the  general  custom  of  that  age,  but  even  an  ascetic  and 
solitary  life;  but  it  can  not  be  ascertained  whether  or  not  they 
were  dressed  in  hairy  garments,  and  lived  as  simply  and  soli- 
tary as  the  bene  nebiim,  which  we  meet  in  a  later  period. 
We  have  no  historical  sources  to  justify  a  supposition  with 
regard  to  an  arrangement  in  the  Levitical  services,  which  is 
ascribed  to  Samuel  by  some  writers,  although  he  may  have 


252  PERIOD    II. 

carried  out  reforms  also  in  that  branch  of  the  national  institu- 
tions. No  high  priest  is  mentioned  in  the  days  of  Samuel,  but 
this  is  not  very  singular,  as  some  writers  suppose,  who  there- 
fore accuse  Samuel  of  an  usurpation  of  that  dignity.  Nothing 
can  be  more  unfounded  than  this  accusation.  Two  high  priests, 
Phineas  and  Eli,  are  mentioned  during  a  period  of  328  years; 
the  former  is  mentioned  occasionally,  and  the  latter  is  men- 
tioned because  he  was  the  chief  magistrate  of  the  nation. 
Still  none  will  infer  from  that  silence  that  former  judges 
usurped  this  power.  Samuel  is  said  to  have  brought  sacriiices; 
but  there  is  not  only  a  slight  difference  in  Hebrew  between 
bring  and  let  bring,  but  it  is  even  the  idiom  of  the  langague 
to  say  of  one  who  brings  the  animal,  that  he  made  or  brought 
a  sacrifice  upon  the  altar.  Besides  all  this  it  must  be  observed, 
that  Samuel,  the  zealous  and  inspired  champion  of  the  Mosaic 
law,  could  not  act  so  decidedly  contrary  to  that  law;  he  was 
a  Levite  as  remarked  before,  and  not  a  son  of  Aaron,  conse- 
quently the  dignity  of  a  high  priest  was  inaccssible  to  him.  It 
appears  from  I  Samuel  xiv,  3,  that  Ahitub,  the  eldest  son  of 
Phineas  and  grandson  of  Eli  succeeded  the  latter  in  the  dignity 
of  high  priest.  The  administration  was  a  happy  one,  as  long 
as  he  had  the  energies  of  manhood,  so  that  he  could  himself 
attend  to  all  the  affairs  of  the  commonwealth ;  but  when  his 
energies  failed,  and  he  entrusted  his  sons  with  a  portion  of  the 
public  duties,  he  had  the  same  melancholy  experience  as  his 
predecessor  Eli;  his  sons  were  not  as  upright  and  disinterested 
as  their  father  was.  The  Bible  remarks,  that  they  were 
avaricious,  were  guilty  of  bribery,  and  diverted  judgment,  and 
Josephus  adds,  that  they  turned  aside  to  every  luxury.  The 
sons  of  Samuel,  Joel  and  Abiah,  gave  great  offence  to  the 
people,  who  had  so  long  a  time  been  accustomed  to  the  govern- 
ment of  upright,  simple,  and  disinterested  men.  The  national 
council  assembled  in  Ramah  in  an  extra  session,  to  devise 
means  of  securing  a  strong  administration  to  the  country, 
Samuel  being  disabled  by  age,  and  his  sons  by  frivolousness, 
from  discharging  the  duties  of  that  office.  They  came  to  the 
conclusion  to  change  the  form  of  government  to  that  of  a  per- 


CHAPTER    VI.  253 

manent  monarchy,  as  all  the  nations  around  them  were 
governed  by  kings.  The  Phclistines  too  had  elected  a  king 
about  the  same  time.  They  most  likely  descried  the  danger 
again  threatening  the  country  on  two  sides,  by  Amnion  and  the 
Phelistines,  and  thought  that  the  strong  hand  of  a  king,  in 
possession  of  a  more  arbitrary  power,  would  maintain  the  union 
of  the  nation  (the  benefit  of  which  they  had  learned  to  appre- 
ciate under  the  administration  of  Samuel,  and  most  likely  also 
of  Eli),  and  an  honorable  and  commanding  attitude  toward  the 
many  petty  nations,  which  troubled  them  unceasingly.  They 
accordingly  desired  Samuel  to  appoint  for  his  successor  a  king, 
who  should  judge  them,  go  out  before  them  (discharge  the 
executive  duties)  and  fight  their  battles.  It  appears  from  the 
succeeding  facts,  that  Samuel  was  desired  to  resign  immediately 
the  executive  duties  into  the  hands  of  a  king,  while  the  func- 
tions of  the  chief  justice,  in  which  capacity  he  also  was  presi- 
dent of  the  upper  branch  of  the  national  council,  should  not  be 
taken  from  his  hands  during  his  lifetime.  Samuel  must  not 
only  have  felt  seriously  offended  that  he  was  desired  to  resign 
the  executive  duties  into  the  hands  of  another  man,  but  he  was 
also  much  grieved  that  the  republic  should  give  way  to  a 
monarchy.  He  was  a  devoted  republican,  and  could  not  all  at 
once  agree  to  this  new  project,  without  showing  to  them  the 
danger  of  this  change  of  government;  how  it  threatened  their 
liberty,  and  the  prosperity  of  the  country,  as  they  had  per- 
ceived only  the  advantages  rising  from  a  monarchical  form  of 
government,  without  considering  also  the  disadvantages;  con- 
sequently, he  in  the  following  words  called  their  attention  to 
the  consequences,  which  a  monarchical  government  might 
have:  "  He  will  take  your  sons,  and  appoint  them  for  himself, 
for  his  chariots,  and  to  be  his  horsemen,  and  some  shall  run 
before  his  chariots.  And  he  will  appoint  them  captains  over 
thousands  and  captains  over  fifties,  and  will  set  them  to  plough 
his  acres,  and  to  reap  his  harvest,  and  to  make  his  instruments 
of  war,  and  instruments  of  his  chariots.  And  he  will  take 
your  daughters  to  be  his  confectioners,  and  to  be  cooks  and  to 
be  bakers.  And  he  will  take  your  fields,  and  your  vine-yards 
and  your  olive-yards,  and  give  them  to  his  officers,  and  to  his 


254  PERIOD    II. 

servants.  He  will  take  the  tenth  of  your  sheep,  and  ye  shall 
be  his  servants.  And  ye  shall  cry  out  on  that  day,  because 
of  the  king  which  ye  shall  have  chosen  you;  and  the  Lord 
will  not  hear  you  on  that  day."* 

This,  however,  can  not  be  understood  to  be  the  rights  of 
an  Israelitish  king  as  granted  to  him  by  the  people ;  for  the 
whole  of  it  is  contrary  to  the  fundamental  laws  of  the  nation. 
Nor  must  it  be  taken  for  a  prophesy,  as  Samuel  never  claimed 
for  himself  the  honor  of  being  called  a  prophet.  It  is  the  ex- 
hortation of  Samuel  to  the  national  council,  directing  their 
attention  to  the  miseries  which  might  possibly  spring  out  of 
a  monarchical  form  of  government.  Still  it  must  be  admitted 
that  some  privileges  of  that  nature  must  have  been  then 
granted  to  the  monarch,  and  were  commonly  thought  insepara- 
ble from  the  royal  dignity ;  for  Samuel  certainly  had  reference 
to  grants  which  must  be  made  to  a  king,  and  "which  if  mis- 
applied might  produce  such  a  state  of  things  as  the  offended  re- 
publican described,  and  which  were  verified,  in  part,  even  by  the 
first  king.  Still  this  was  insufficient  to  convince  the  uational 
council  of  the  disadvantages,  and  they  insisted  upon  their 
demand.  Samuel,  after  having  strengthened  his  heart  in  pious 
prayers,  promised  to  comply  with  their  demands  at  the  earliest 
opportunity,  upon  which  the  national  council  adjourned.  Sam- 
uel was  an  opponent  to  the  monarchical  institution,  and  opposed 
the  current  strongly,  though  in  vain.  This  has  given  much 
trouble  to  the  critics:  why  should  he  so  sternly  resist  com- 
plying with  the  wishes  of  the  people  when  Moses  himself 
sanctioned  the  royal  institute?  They  have  speculated  on  the 
section  of  the  Pentateuch  concerning  the  king  (Deutr.  xvii,  14- 
20),  thinking  it  must  be  an  interpolation  of  a  later  date,  of 
which  Samuel  knew  nothing;  that  the  royal  prerogatives  were 
dangerous  to  the  theocratical  institutes,  and  especially  to  the 
power  of  the  priests ;  and  that  Samuel  was  offended,  that  he 
should  yield  his  power  to  another  man.  Such  are  the  different 
ideas  on  the  subject.  As  regards  the  first  one  we  do  not  see 
when  the  section  regarding  the  king  could  have  been  interpo- 

*  I  Samuel  viii,  11-19;  Antiquities  b.  VI,  c.  iii,  5. 


CHAPTER   VI.  255 

lated;  certainly  not  during  the  time  of  the  monarchy;  for  if  a 
king  had  been  elevated  without  that  law,  he  could  never  have 
admitted  a  law  into  the  national  code,  which  limits  the  royal 
prerogatives  to  but  a  few  privileges.  It  can  not  have  been 
interpolated  after  the  captivity,  on  account  of  its  peculiar  pro- 
hibition in  regard  to  occasioning  the  people  to  return  to  Egypt, 
which  was  not  at  all  practicable  after  the  Babylonian  captivity, 
when  the  prohibition  to  settle  in  Egypt  was  not  observed  any 
longer.  It  has  certainly  not  been  inserted  without  a  positive 
necessity;  for  without  a  peculiar  cause  none  had  ever  the 
daring  courage  to  interpolate  a  national  code,  which  was  re- 
garded as  emanating  directly  from  the  Deity;  wherefore  we 
may  assume  with  no  slight  degree  of  justice,  that  Samuel  was 
aware  of  that  section  of  the  Pentateuch.  A  king  was  by  no 
means  dangerous  to  the  theocratical  institutions  of  the  land, 
if  the  people  were  powerful  enough  to  maintain  the  fundamental 
laws  of  the  country,  and  to  keep  royalty  within  its  proper 
limits.  The  priests  had  no  political  power  granted  to  them  by 
law,  and  so  the  second  argument  falls  to  the  ground.  And  as 
regards  the  personal  objections  of  Samuel,  we  do  not  see  why 
we  should  charge  an  old  and  tried  patriot  with  such  a  high 
degree  of  selfishness,  as  to  oppose  the  popular  will  merely  on 
account  of  himself,  who  had  but  a  few  years  more  to  live,  and 
there  is  not  the  slightest  proof  to  justify  such  an  accusation. 
It  appears  to  us  in  quite  a  different  light.  The  importance  of 
the  Mosaic  policy  is  by  no  means  dependant  on  the  chief  magis- 
trate of  the  nation;  it  depends  solely  on  the  maintenance  of 
the  laws,  no  matter  who  maintains  them.  There  must  be  an 
executive  head;  but  there  is  no  vital  importance  to  be  attached 
to  the  name  of  the  executive  chief.  It  is  imprudent  to  make 
laws  for  many  coming  generations,  without  providing  for  a 
change  of  government  in  case  a  sound  policy  should  at  some 
future  time  require  it.  If  the  law  provides  not  for  such  a 
revolution,  it  would  cost  lives,  and  be  the  cause  of  anarchy  for 
some  time.  The  only  question  was,  whether  it  was  a  good 
policy  at  that  time  to  change  the  form  of  government;  the 
national  council  thought  it  was,  as  we  have  seen  above.  Sam- 
uel thought  it  was  not;  for  he  was   aware  how  apt  the   people 


256  PERIOD    II. 

were  to  forsake  the  law,  and  if  the  king  in  such  a  state  of 
things  would  have  improved  the  advantage,  he  might  easily 
have  set  the  law  at  defiance  and  reigned  absolutely,  which,  in- 
deed, was  the  case  more  than  once  during  the  period  of  the 
monarchy.  The  words  of  Samuel  express  this  most  distinctly : 
"  If  ye  will  fear  the  Lord,  and  serve  him,  and  obey  his  voice, 
and  ye  will  not  rebel  against  the  commandment  of  the  Lord, 
you  and  the  king  reigning  over  you  will  be  after  the  Lord 
your  God  (within  the  law).  But  if  you  will  not  obey  the 
voice  of  the  Lord,  and  ye  will  rebel  against  the  commandments 
of  the  Lord,  then  the  hand  of  the  Lord  will  be  against  you 
and  against  your  parents"  (I  Samuel  xii,  14,  15).  At  the  end 
of  the  same  chapter  he  says  again,  "  Only  fear  the  Lord,  and 
serve  him  in  truth  with  all  your  heart;  for  consider  what 
great  things  he  has  done  for  you,"  which  would  mean  in  an 
ordinary  political  sense,  if  the  people  would  obey  the  law,  by 
virtue  of  which  they  were  a  happy  nation  nearly  four  hun- 
dred years,  their  king  would  be  obliged  to  respect  that  law, 
and  to  govern  accordingly,  which  is  the  only  security  to  their 
national  prosperity.  But  if  they  depart  from  the  law,  the 
king,  seizing  the  opportunity,  will  assume  despotical  privileges, 
which  would  terminate  in  a  dissolution  of  the  nationality,  and 
consequently  also  in  the  close  of  the  royal  dignity. 

Saul,  the  son  of  Kish  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  who  had 
superintended  the  estate  of  his  father,  without  being  much 
concerned  in  the  political  affairs  of  his  country,  had  searched 
some  time  for  his  father's  asses,  which  were  lost.  Unable  to 
find  them,  he  went,  on  the  suggestion  of  his  servant,  to  the 
abode  of  the  prophet,  to  ask  him  about  them.  When  there,  the 
Lord  told  Samuel,  that  this  was  the  man  whom  he  had  chosen 
to  be  king  over  Israel,  which  Samuel  told  the  surprised  Saul. 
Having  honored  the  newly  appointed  king  at  a  public  dinner, 
Samuel  annointed  Saul  to  the  royal  office,  and  after  having 
given  him.  some  tokens  (which  speedily  occurred),  that  he  was 
appointed  by  God,  he  dismissed  him.  Samuel  convoked  the 
national  council  at  Mizpah,  and  after  having  again  exhorted 
them  about  their  policy,  the  lot  decided  who  should  be  the  first 
king  of  Israel.     Saul  was  pointed   out  by  the   lot,  but  he  had 


CHAPTER   VI.  257 

concealed  himself  under  the  baggage.  He  was  brought  before 
the  people,  and  he  was  one  head  taller  than  any  other  man 
present.  Samuel  announced  to  the  assembly  that  this  was 
their  king,  and  all  of  them  shouted,  ''Long  live  the  king." 
The  multitude  who  feared  the  Lord  followed  him;  but  the 
lower  class  of  people  despised  him. 

This  is  the  quintessence  of  the  ninth  and  tenth  chapter  of  I 
Samuel,  with  which  Josephus  almost  literally  corresponds; 
still  it  would  not  appear  to  us,  that  the  history  of  the  elec- 
tion of  the  first  king  is  here  given  as  it  occurred.  It  is  stated 
that  God  told  Samuel  to  annoint  Saul,  that  the  casting  of  the 
lot  decided  in  his  favor  at  Mizpah  in  the  presence  of  the 
whole  assembly;  still  we  read  in  the  next  chapter,  that  the 
people  said  to  Samuel,  "  Who  said  Saul  shall  reign  over  us? 
give  us  the  men  that  we  kill  them;"  still  Samuel  does  not 
refer  to  those  facts,  he  says,  "  I  have  hearkened  to  your  voice 
as  you  have  said  unto  me,  and  I  gave  you  a  king."  "  And 
now  here  is  the  king,  whom  you  have  chosen,  whom  you  have 
desired,  God  has  given  you  a  king."  Besides  this  difficulty  in 
the  records,  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  think,  that  either  God 
or  the  aged  and  experienced  statesman,  Samuel,  appointed  a 
man  to  the  highest  office  on  account  of  his  tall  figure ;  when  it 
is  evident  by  his  career,  as  recorded  in  the  same  book,  that  he 
became  a  tyrant  with  no  particular  talents  as  a  warrior  or  as 
a  statesman.  Was  there  no  better  man  in  Israel  to  fill  that 
office?  If  we  allow,  that  this  piece  has  all  the  characteristics 
of  a  late  production,  and  was  probably  written  to  account  for 
the  popular  proverb  "  Is  also  Saul  among  the  prophets,"  we 
will  be  rather  inclined  to  take  the  story,  which  has  the  appear- 
ance of  probability. 

The  tribe  of  Benjamin,  having  advanced  to  power  of  late  by 
the  fact  that  it  was  the  center  of  the  nation  during  the  peace- 
ful and  prosperous  administration  of  Samuel,  thought  of  means 
to  secure  the  general  demand  for  a  king  in  favor  of  one  of 
its  sons,  in  order  to  secure  to  the  tribe  the  benefits  which 
it  had  tasted  during  many  years.  A  public  feast  was  ar- 
ranged, Saul  was  brought  to  the  prophet  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
17 


258  PERIOD  II. 

appear  a  mere  incidence.  The  prophet  and  Saul  went  together 
to  the  feast;  the  Benjamites  hailed  the  approach  of  Saul, 
they  honored  him,  and  he  was  so  much  distinguished  among 
all  the  people,  that  the  prophet  observed  their  intentions.  He 
knew  how  much  importance  the  people  attached  to  outward 
appearance  and  was  therefore  convinced  that  the  influence  of 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin  would  succeed  in  electing  their  candidate. 
He  was  entitled  to  propose  a  candidate  to  the  national  coun- 
cil, according  to  the  .resolutions  of  that  body,  but  he  must 
have  naturally  anticipated  a  civil  war,  to  prevent  which  he 
resigned  his  prerogative  to  propose  a  candidate,  and  consented 
to  a  popular  election,  which  the  inspired  writer  calls  a  decision 
by  casting  the  lot.  Saul  informed  of  those  plans  of  his  tribe 
sought  the  favor  of  the  literati,  the  prophets;  he  freely  asso- 
ciated with  them,  and  the  proverb  "  Is  also  Saul  among  the 
prophets,"  shows,  that  he  was  not  one  of  them,  but  only 
seeking  their  favor  for  the  moment.  The  influence  of  Benja- 
min, and  the  personal  appearance  of  Saul,  succeeded  in  secur- 
ing to  him  the  election  at  the  meeting  of  the  national  council, 
at  Mizpah;  but  Saul  had  at  once  great  and  powerful  opponents, 
as  we  shall  learn  hereafter.  Still  the  piece  having  been  com- 
posed in  the  time  of  the  monarchy,  the  opponents  are  called 
Beni  Belial,  low  people.  Samuel,  caring  now  more  for  the 
maintenance  of  the  law  than  for  the  person  of  the  king,  to 
which  no  particular  importance  was  attached,  expounded  to  the 
assembly  the  prerogatives  of  the  king,  which  he  wrote  down 
to  be  preserved  before  God,  by  the  priests  who  were  the  guard- 
ians of  the  written  copy  of  the  law.  This  is  the  first  constitu- 
tion on  record,  and  it  was  undoubtedly  on  a  broad  and  liberal 
basis,  as  Samuel  was  not  only  a  thorough  republican,  but  also  a 
powerful  advocate  of  the  laws  of  Moses,  according  to  which 
the  royal  prerogatives  were  much  limited.  It  was,  as  we  shall 
see  hereafter,  a  gentle  transition  from  republican  institutions  to 
a  limited  monarchy.  So  the  Israelitish  republic  ended  (1080, 
b.  c),  after  nearly  400  years  of  existence,  without  the  slight- 
est disturbance  of  the  peace,  which  speaks  very  favorably, 
not  only  for  the  laws  of  Moses,  but  also  for  the  political  ac- 
complishments of  the  nation. 


APPENDIX    TO    PERIOD    II.  259 


APPENDIX   TO   PERIOD  II 


I.  THE  PEOPLE  AND  THE  COUNTRY. 

The  land  was  divided  among  all  the  Israelites  in  equal  lots, 
as  Moses  had  commanded.  The  only  exception  in  this  respect 
was,  that  the  land  not  in  their  possession  was  also  divided 
among  the  tribes,  but  not  among  individuals,  as  there  was 
plenty  of  it  in  their  possession  to  give  to  each  a  sufficient 
portion. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  people  inhabiting  the  land 
west  of  Jordan,  yielded  their  pastoral  occupation  to  agriculture, 
because  the  land  was  not  large  enough  to  support  so  numerous 
a  population,  if  exclusively  engaged  in  pastoral  pursuits.  The 
nature  of  the  soil  too,  was  -better  calculated  for  agricultural 
than  pastoral  purposes.  There  were  an  abundance  of  tropical 
fruits  and  wine,  and  the  soil  amply  repaid  the  toil  of  the  hus- 
bandmen, only  the  northern  district,  afterwards  called  Galilee, 
was  best  adapted  for  grazing  purposes,  and  there  we  indeed 
find  the  pastoral  family  of  Heber  dwelling  in  tents  (Judges  iv, 
11-22),  which  leads  us  to  believe,  that  the  pastoral  mode  of 
living  was  continued  for  a  considerable  time  in  that  part  of  the 
country.  The  passage  of  Josephus,  quoted  above,*  supports 
our  views  on  agriculture  among  the  early  Israelites. 

It  is  natural  to  think  that  the  people  east  of  the  Jordan,  and 
those  who  occupied  the  valleys  of  Arabia  Petrese,  being  rich 
in  live  stock,  occupying  districts  which  were  best  calculated 
for  grazing  purposes,  and  having  plenty  of  space  to  feed  their 
herds,  continued  their  pastoral  pursuits  for  a  long  time,  so  that 
Deborah   could   still   say    of  Reuben,     "  Why   dost    thou   sit 

♦Page  219. 


260  APPENDIX    TO 

among  the  sheepfolds  to  hear  the  bleatings  of  the  flocks." 
Still  we  are  told,  that  Amnion,  whose  invasion  chiefly  con- 
cerned the  eastern  provinces,  came  up  and  destroyed  the  seeds 
and  crops  of  the  land.  This  plainly  informs  us,  that  agricul- 
ture was  favored  also  in  the  eastern  provinces,  although  the 
pastoral  employments  predominated  for  many  centuries  in  that 
part  of  the  country. 

The  domestic  animals  consisted  of  sheep,  goats,  cattle,  and 
the  ass.  No  mention  is  made  of  other  animals.  The  sheep 
and  the  goat  could  be  well  sustained  by  the  rich  foliage  of  the 
mountainous  regions,  while  cattle  could  be  raised  in  the  grazing 
districts.  The  bullock  is  mentioned  as  the  only  assistant  in 
agricultural  labor,  so  that  in  the  time  of  Solomon  the  proverb 
was  yet  afloat,  "Much  crops  are  in  the  strength  of  the  ox." 
Wherever  the  act  of  ploughing  is  mentioned,  it  is  always  re- 
presented as  done  with  oxen.  The  ass  was  the  traveling 
companion ;  neither  horse  nor  camel  is  mentioned  in  this  pe- 
riod, but  whenever  riding  is  mentioned  it  is  upon  an  ass.  The 
total  absence  of  camels  and  horses  is  no  slight  evidence  that 
the  Israelites  did  not  roam  in  the  wilderness  after  they  had 
taken  possession  of  their  land,  as  some  writers  are  anxious  to 
make  their  readers  believe,  although  they  occupied  some  valleys 
and  oases  for  pastoral  purposes.  The  staple  productions  of  the 
country  during  this  period  as  mentioned  in  our  sources,  were 
wheat,  olive  and  wine,  the  fig,  barley,  animal  and  vegetable 
honey,  are  also  mentioned.  There  is  a  general  opulence  visi- 
ble in  all  the  records  in  our  possession,  which  it  appears  has 
been  the  principal  cause  of  the  different  invasions,  those  of  the 
Phelistines  excepted,  always  resulting  in  paying  tribute  to  the 
victorious  enemy.  These  facts  account  for  the  good  understand- 
ing which  existed  between  Israel  and  Phoenicia.  The  latter 
were  then  the  merchants  of  the  civilized  world,  and  the  Israel- 
ites, as  we  have  remarked  before,  were  not  inclined  to  engage 
in  foreign  commerce,  which  the  Phoenicians  most  likely  trans- 
acted for  them.  Phoenicia  could  not  produce  sufficient  to 
support  her  people,  and  as  it  appears  from  the  bargain  of  Solo- 
mon with  Hiram  (I  Kings,  v,  25),   the  people   of  that  country 


PERIOD    II.  261 

depended  on  Palestine  for  the  supply  of  wheat,  wine,  olives, 
and,  most  likely,  also  of  wool,  leather,  butter  and  cheese.  Be- 
sides this  it  was  a  prudent  policy  of  the  Phoenicians  which 
they  observed  towards  the  Israelites,  as  the  latter  were  their 
bulwarks  against  the  roving  incursions  of  the  south-eastern 
nomadic  tribes,  who  continually  molested  the  Israelites.  The 
same  peaceable  relations  might  have  existed  between  the  Phe- 
listines  and  Israelites,  had  not  an  old  and  invincible  hatred 
separated  forever  the  sons  of  Israel  from  the  children  of  Anak> 
The  unceasing  hatred  of  the  Phelistines  may  also  have  been 
nourished  by  the  friendly  relations  between  Israel  and  Phoe- 
nicia, who  excluded  the  Phelistines  almost  entirely  from 
trading  with  the  nations  of  the  interior,  and  prevented  them 
from  making  new  conquests  in  Asia.  A  highway  through  Pa- 
lestine to  the  east  seems  to  have  been  the  object  for  which  the 
Phelistines  undertook  so  many  expeditions.  We  are  never 
told  that  they  demanded  tribute  of  Israel,  or  that  they  in- 
tended to  take  possession  of  the  whole  land,  which  was  then 
the  usual  result  of  a  victory.  They  always  proceeded  from 
west  to  east,  in  almost  a  straight  line.  The  commerce  with 
the  opulent  Palestine,  and  a  highway  through  that  country, 
seem  to  have  been  the  objects  for  which  they  fought.  The 
Mazab  Pelishtim,  or  Phelistine  garrisons,  which  are  mentioned 
in  Samuel,  seem  to  have  been  there  for  the  purpose  of  guarding 
the  highway  of  their  commerce,  which  was  granted  to  them  in 
the  peace  when  returning  the  ark,  and  which  became  after- 
wards, in  the  reign  of  Saul,  the  cause  of  war.  Such  garrisons, 
we  are  told,  existed  in  Palestine  in  the  days  of  Samuel,  al- 
though we  are  informed  that  the  Phelistines  did  not  disturb 
the  peace 'of  the  country  during  the  administration  of  Samuel, 
which  represents  everywhere,  and  especially  in  the  closing 
scene,  a  time  of  profound  peace.  We  therefore  are  led  to 
believe  about  those  garrisons,  what  we  have  often  stated,  not 
seeing  therein  any  contradiction  of  which  other  writers  made 
mention.  It  is  evident,  that  notwithstanding  the  perpetual 
exertions  of  the  Phelistines,  the  Israelites  continued  to  trade 
with  the  Phoenicians,  so  that  the  words  Canaanite  and  mer- 


262  APPENDIX    TO 

chant  became  identical,  and  the  Phoenicians  were  undoubtedly 
cognates  of  the  Canaanites,  with  whom  they  afterwards  largely 
amalgamated.  The  Canaanites  invading  the  country  in  the 
days  of  Deborah,  most  likely  were  parts  of  that  nation,  who 
led  a  nomadic  life  in  the  valleys  between  Lebanon  and  Anti- 
Lebanon.  The  friendship  existing  between  their  king,  Barak, 
and  the  pastoral  family  of  Heber.  seem  to  favor  this  supposition 
(Judges  iv,  17).  The  Canaanites  easily  amalgamated  with  the 
Israelites,  because  they,  as  well  as  the  Phoenicians,  were  their 
cognates,  and  most  likely  spoke  the  same  language,  although 
the  dialect  of.  the  Israelites  was  certainly  strongly  modified  by 
their  long  stay  in  Egypt.  All  the  objections  that  could  be 
made  to  the  consanguinity  of  the  Israelites,  Phoenicians  and 
Canaanites,  their  descent  from  different  sons  of  Noah;  the  two 
former  descended  from  Shem,  and  the  latter  from  Ham.  But 
it  is  certainly  of  no  important  consideration  that  they  were 
the  descendants  of  different  sons  of  the  same  father.  The  dis- 
tinctions in  language,  manners,  customs,  &c,  could  have 
arisen  only  when  the  tribes  had  separated  from  each  other,  and 
were  not  only  exposed  for  a  long  time  to  the  influences  of  dif- 
ferent climates,  but  also  of  different  occupations,  connections 
with  other  nations,  and  other  causes.  But  the  Canaanites, 
Phoenicians  and  Hebrews  were  Noachides,  who  inhabited  the 
same  tract  of  land,  exposed  to  the  same  influences,  and  did 
not  differ  materially  from  each  other.  Abraham  himself  spoke 
to  Abimelech,  the  children  of  Heth  to  the  kings  of  Salem  and 
Sedom;  because  then  the  languages  of  the  Noachidic  tribes  did 
not  yet  differ  so  materially  as  that  they  could  not  understand 
each  other,  while  two  hundred  years  later  the  Egyptians  did 
not  understand  the  Hebrews,  because  they  were  long  enough 
separated  from  the  other  Noachides.  Our  divisions  into  Semi- 
tic languages,  Hamitic  languages,  &c,  are  not  exact.  They 
apply  more  to  countries,  where  the  descendants  of  the  one  or 
the  other  of  the  sons  of  Noah  were  more  predominant.  The 
names  of  Canaanitish  cities,  such  as  Jericho,  Kadash,  En 
Mishpat,  Salem,  Jerusalem;  and  of  persons,  as  Ephron,  Mal- 
kisedek,  Adoni-Zedek,  leave  no  doubt  that  the  Canaanites  spoko 


PERIOD    II.  263 

the  Hebrew,  as  the  Phoenicians  and   the  Hebrews  did;  in  the 
dialect  only  they  may  have  differed. 

The  iron  implements  of  that  age  for  agricultural  and  other 
domestic  purposes  are  mentioned  (I  Samuel  xiii,  20,  21),  to 
have  consisted  of  the  ploughshare,  the  coulter,  the  axe,  the 
mattock,  the  forks,  and  the  goads.  The  implements  of  war 
were  the  sword,  the  spear,  the  bow  and  arrow,  the  sling,  and 
most  likely  also  the  shield,  the  helmet  of  brass,  the  coat  of 
mail  (I  Samuel  xvii,  38).  No  mention  is  made  of  cavalry, 
iron  chariots,  or  implements  of  siege,  which  they  did  not  need, 
because  the  Israelites,  in  accordance  with  the  Mosaic  policy, 
did  not  invade  a  foreign  country  during  the  time  of  the  repub- 
lic; and  the  arms  mentioned  above  were  sufficient  to  protect 
the  country  against  their  nomadic  neighbors,  although  they 
should  have  had  more  efficient  arms  against  the  Phelistines, 
who,  it  appears,  excelled  the  Israelites  in  this  point.  The 
trumpet  was  the  principal  musical  instrument  used  in  the  army; 
wherefore  the  phrase,  "  to  blow  the  trumpet,"  was  significant 
of  assembling  the  army.  Besides  this,  .the  tamborine,  the 
cistrum  and  other  musical  instruments  are  frequently  men- 
tioned. 

Fortified  towns,  castles  and  towers  are  mentioned  also  in 
the  interior  of  the  country,  as  Shechem  and  Tebez.  Single 
standing  houses  too  are  mentioned;  but  we  do  not  know  how 
the  houses  were  built  and  furnished.  The  chair — the  only 
piece  of  furniture  which  is  mentioned — shows  that  the  Israel- 
ites did  not  sit  on  the  floor  with  crossed  legs,  as  other 
orientals  do.  Bread  of  wheat  and  barley  is  the  principal  food 
mentioned,  besides  this,  we  read  of  roasted  and  parched  ears 
of  corn,  of  meat  and  sauces,  of  salt  and  spices  used  in  the 
food.  Still,  it  appears,  that  meat  was  used  on  festive  occasions 
only.  Wine  and  milk  were  the  chief  drinks.  The  former  must, 
however,  have  been  considered  in  an  unfavorable  light,  because 
both  Samson  and  Samuel  were  nazirs  from  their  birth.  The 
family  life  continued  in  a  patriarchal  manner:  the  father  was 
the  highest  authority  of  the  house.  Gideon,  after  having 
destroyed  the  idol,  stood  under  the   protection  of  his  father, 


264  APPENDIX    TO 

of  whom  his  agitated  townsmen  demanded  him,  although  he 
was  certainly  considerably  advanced  in  age,  having  been 
appointed  already  to  the  highest  office.  Saul  traveled  to  lind 
the  asses  of  his  father,  whose  estate  he  superintended,  although 
he  was  by  no  means  a  young  man.  Bigamy  was  not  prohibited, 
but  it  was  rarely  practiced,  as  the  genealogical  tables  show. 
The  position  of  wonian  was  eminent.  The  greatest  reward 
that  could  be  promised  for  the  undertaking  of  a  dangerous 
adventure  was,  to  give  one's  daughter  for  a  wife  to  the  victor. 
The  daughters  of  Israel  celebrated  feasts  in  the  vineyards  near 
Shiloh,  with  music  and  dances.  They  were,  therefore,  not 
locked  into  harems,  as  among  other  oriental  nations.  They  had 
the  same  political  rights  as  men  had,  which  becomes  evident 
by  the  office  held  by  Deborah.  They  held  in  religious  affairs 
the  same  position  with  man.  The  angel  appeared  to  the  mother 
of  Samson;  Hannah  prayed  at  Shiloh  in  presence  of  the  high 
priest;  and  Elkanah  never  came  to  Shiloh  without  his  wives. 
The  general  attention  with  which  the  returning  Naomi  and 
the  lovely  Ruth  were  treated  at  Bethlehem,  is  significant  of  the 
great  respect  with  which  women  were  treated.  Her  honor  and 
chastity  were  protected,  as  sacred  and  inviolable,  so  much  so 
that  the  behavior  of  some  young  men  of  Gibeah,  in  Benjamin, 
towards  the  concubine  of  the  Levite  was  considered  a  causus 
belli.  The  rights  and  the  state  of  a  concubine  are  not  defined 
in  our  sources.  An  illustration  in  this  respect  is  noticed  in  the 
family  of  Jacob.  They  were  handmaids,  probably  daughters  of 
foreigners  living  in  Palestine,  who  were  sold  by  their  parents, 
and  afterwards  liberated  from  bondage  by  their  masters.  Their 
children,  as  was  the  case  with  the  sons  of  Jacob  by  the  concu- 
bines, had  equal  rights  with  those  of  the  legitimate  wives.  We 
have  represented  to  the  reader  a  picture  of  that  age,  which  is 
altogether  contrary  to  that  which  other  historians  have  given, 
who  endeavor  to  represent  the  age  of  the  Israelitish  republic 
as  a  time  of  ignorance,  of  outrage,  violence  and  wrong.  But 
this  is  positively  untrue ;  a  people  depending  on  agricultural 
pursuits,  which  is  effected  by  efficient  implements,  and  to  such 
an  extent,  that  it  becomes  the  source  of  wealth  to  the  com- 


PERIOD     II.  265 

munity;  a  people  living  in  houses,  and  in  fortified  towns,  in 
legitimate  families,  and  subsisting  on  the  best  products  of  a 
fertile  land;  a  people  being  four  hundred  years  governed  by  the 
same  laws  without  the  occurrence  of  more  than  two  revolutions 
of  any  considerable  importance,  and  finally  effecting  a  change 
of  government  without  the  loss  of  one  life;  a  people  never 
invading  a  foreign  country,  and  still  protecting  its  own  ter- 
ritory against  so  many  enemies ;  a  people  among  whom  the 
position  of  woman  was  higher  than  in  modern  society,  is  a 
great  and  noble  people;  and  there  is  certainly  no  trace  of  out- 
rage, violence  and  ignorance  to  justify  those  historians,  who 
debase  the  whole  age  on  account  of  single  occurrences, ^which 
are  completely  eclipsed  by  numerous  marks  of  civilization  and 
prosperity.  We  may  safely  assert,  that  this  period  of  Israelitish 
history  has  been  misunderstood  by  almost  all  our  predecessors. 
We  shall  show  that  this  was  the  case  as  we  proceed. 

II.  THE  GOVERNMENT  AND  THE  LAWS. 

The  prophet  Isaiah,  by  birth  a  prince  of  the  royal  line  of 
David,  when  blessing  his  people  in  inspired  terms,  knows  of  no 
better  blessing  than  this,  "And  I  will  restore  thy  judges  as  at 
the  first,  and  thy  counsellors  as  at  the  beginning."  The  time 
of  the  Judges,  as  the  period  of  the  republic  was  afterwards 
called  (Ruth  i,  1),  must  have  been  a  happy  and  prosperous 
time  for  Israel.  The  manly  opposition  to  a  change  of  govern- 
ment which  the  aged  and  experienced  Samuel  offered,  is  con- 
clusive evidence  to  this  effect.  It  is  a  pity  that  it  was  not 
appreciated  by  the  contemporaries  of  Samuel,  and  that  it  has 
been  altogether  misunderstood  by  modern  historians.  Before 
we  attempt  an  exposition  of  the  government,  we  must  indulge 
in  some  remarks  on  the  chronology  of  that  period. 

There  are  but  two  statements  in  the  sacred  records  in  regard 
to  chronology.  Jephthah,  in  his  message  to  the  king  of  Ammon 
states,  that  Israel  occupied  the  cities  claimed  by  that  king  for 
about  three  hundred  years  (Judges  xi,  26).  The  second  one 
occurs  I  Kings  (vi,  1),  that  Solomon  commenced  the  building 
of  the  temple  four  hundred  and  eighty  years  after  the  exode, 


266  APPENDIX    TO 

This  was  in  the  second  month  of  the  fourth  year  of  the  reign 
of  Solomon  (ibid,  and  verse  37),  consequently  we  reckon  it  as 
three  years.  The  reign  of  David  occupied  forty  years  (I  Kings, 
ii,  11) ;  and  if  we  add  to  this  the  forty  years  Israelties  passed  in 
the  wilderness,  and  subtract  the  whole  from  four  hundred  and 
eighty,  three  hundred  and  ninety-seven  years  are  left  for  the 
period  of  the  republic  and  the  reign  of  Saul. 

We  have  taken  for  this  period  365  years,  which  leaves  for 
the  reign  of  Saul  thirty-two  years.  Josephus  informs  us,  that 
Saul  reigned  forty  years;*  but  the  number  forty  occurs  so 
often  as  the  term  of  a  judge  or  of  a  king,  that  we  are  nowhere 
sure  of  its  accuracy.  The  statement  of  Josephus  assures  us, 
at  any  rate,  that  we  have  not  assigned  too  long  a  time  to  Saul, 
and  consequently  not  too  short  a  time  to  the  judges. 

The  chronology  of  the  Chinese  Jews,|  who  reckon  443  years 
for  the  period  of  the  judges;  and  the  statement  of  Josephus  of 
592  years. J  which  he  himself  contradicted,!  are  not  sufficiently 
important  to  invalidate  the  dates  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  quoted 
above.  We  therefore  reckon  but  365  years  for  this  period, 
for  which  we  have  the  authority  of  some  ancient  commentators, 
and  partly  also  of  Professor  De  Wette.|| 

We  could  not  see  any  reason  why  the  episode  of  Samson 
should  be  set  in  the  time  of  Eli;  as  the  passages  in  Judges  (x, 
7;  xiii,  5)  are  conclusive  to  the  contrary,  and  as  the  whole 
tenor  of  the  story  of  Samson  is  of  such  a  nature,  that  we  are 
entitled  to  believe,  that  Samson  made  an  end  to  the  supremacy 
of  the  Phelistines  in  Canaan.  The  passage  m  ypinb  Srr  Kim 
SmBf  "  And  he  will  commence  to  save  Israel  from  the  hands  of 
the  Phelistines,"  must  be  understood  as  Kimchi  did,  as  a  cen- 
sure on  former  judges  who  had  done  nothing  towards  saving  the 

*  Antiqu.  VI,  xiv,  19-,  vide  A.  G.  xiii,  21. 

f  Tacit.  Opp.  ed.  Brotier  hi.  567  sqq.  de  Judseis  sinensibus;  vide  A,  G< 
xiii,  20. 

t  Antiqu.  VIII,  iii,  ], 

$  Antiqu.  XX,  x,  1 ;  contra  Apion  ii,  2. 

H  Archaeology.     Leipzig  1842,  $  23-27. 


PEiuoD  n.  267 

Israelites  from  the  Phelistines.  If  Samson  nourished  before 
Eli,  and  the  invasion  of  the  Phelistines  commenced  either 
shortly  before,  or  simultaneously  with  the  Amnion  invasion, 
which  lasted  eighteen  years,  and  if  Samson  made  an  end  to 
that  supremacy  as  Jeplithah  did,  on  the  other  side,  to  Ammon, 
then  Jeplithah  must  have  flourished  shortly  before  Samson,  in 
the  time  of  Abdon  ben  Hillell.  In  our  sources  the  beginning  of 
those  invasions  is  noticed  in  the  right  place,  after  the  death  of 
Jair  (Judges  x,  (5-10).  But  then  the  author  narrated  the  story 
of  Jeplithah  (xi-xii,  7),  because  occuring  previously  to  the 
administration  of  Samson  with  which  Jephthah's  own  words 
agree  (xi,  26).  Having,  finished  this,  our  author  mentioned 
the  names  of  the  three  judges  of  that  period  (xii,  8-15).  Next  he 
had  to  narrate  the  occurrences  of  Samson's  administration,  to 
which  he  prefixed  the  adventures  of  that  hero,  which  attracted 
the  attention  of  the  nation  to  his  valor.  We  see  no  other  way 
to  account  for  the  passage  in  Judges  x,  6-10.  Abimelech,  the 
son  of  Gideon,  could  not  be  reckoned  among  the  judges,  as 
the  whole  story  characterizes  it  as  a  revolution  against  the 
will  of  the  people  (Judges  ix,  55),  and  against  the  will  of 
Gideon  (viii,  22,  23).  The  people  of  Shechem  and  some  hired 
champions  were  the  only  supporters  of  Abimelech;  his  au* 
thority  was  limited  to  that  one  city  and  its  vicinity.  We  can 
not  imagine,  that  the  people  had  no  judge  on  account  of  the 
revolt  of  one  city.  We  therefore  suppose  the  beginning  of 
chapter  x  properly  belongs  after  viii,  35.  Our  author  concludes 
the  story  of  Gideon  with  the  statement,  "neither  shewed  they 
kindness  to  the  house  of  Jerubaal,  [Gideon]  according  to  all 
the  goodness  which  he  had  shewed  unto  Israel,"  and  then, 
before  continuing  the  history  after  Gideon,  narrates  in  chapter 
ix,  the  story  of  Abimelech,  concerning  his  summary  state- 
ment in  regard  to  the  house  of  Gideon.  He  also  remarks  (x, 
1),  that  Thola  saved  Israel,  without,  however,  stating  from 
what  danger  or  enemy  he  saved  Israel.  But  according  to  our 
arrangement  of  the  affairs,  our  author  referred  to  the  act  of 
Thoia  in  saving  Israel  from  the  hands  of  Abimelech.  The 
terms,  bxrw  fix  yunrh  i^dok  nnK.Dp,l  can  be  rendered,  "  There 


268  APPENDIX    TO 

arose  against  Abimelech  to  save  Israel,"  without   forcing  the 
original  in  the  least* 

We  therefore  take  for  granted,  that  the  period  of  the  repub- 
lic occupied  365  years;  that  there  was  no  interval  between 
the  death  of  a  judge  and  the  beginning  of  his  successor's 
administration,  and  that  the  successor  must  have  been  appoint* 
ed  during  the  lifetime  of  the  officiating  judge.  The  records  of 
wars  and  subjection  of  the  nation  at  diiferent  times,  must,  of 
course,  be  reckoned  in  the  administration  of  the  one  or  the 
other  judge  as  we  have  done.  The  policy  of  the  age  will 
become  apparent  by  taking  another  view  of  the  judges, 
Joshua  was  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim;  Othniel  of  the  tribe  of 
Jehudah,  his  successor  Ehud  was  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin; 
the  tribe  of  Shamgar  is  not  mentioned;  Barak  was  of  the  tribe 
of  Naphthali,  Gilead  was  of  the  tribe  of  Menassah;  Thola  was 
was  of  Issachar;  J  air  was  of  the  tribe  of  Gad;  so  was  Jephthah, 
probably,  or  of  the  tribe  of  Reuben;  Ibzon  was  of  Jehudah, 
Elon  was  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulon,  Abdon  was  of  Ephraim; 
Samson  was  of  the  tribe  of  Dan;  Eli  and  Samuel  of  the  tribe 
of  Levi.  This  shows  that  it  was  either  an  accident  or  a 
maxim  that  the  highest  office  was  transferred  from  one  tribe 
to  the  other.  If  we  suppose  that  Shamgar  was  of  the  tribe 
of  Simeon  (his  early  campaigns  against  the  Phelistines  lead 
to  this  supposition)  and  that  Jephthah  was  a  Reubenite,  we  see 
the  highest  office  pass  through  all  tribes  except  Asher,  of  whom 
most  likely,  Deborah  descended,  so  that  but  Ephraim  and 
Jehudah,  and  at  last  Levi,  had  two  judges.  It  must  then  be 
admitted  that  it  was  not  a  mere  accident,  but  a  settled  policy, 
to  maintain  the  equality  of  the  tribes,  without  granting  a 
supremacy  to  one  or  the  other.  And  at  last,  when  a  king  was 
elected,  the  same  policy  was  observed.  The  first  two  judges 
were  of  the  tribes  of  Ephraim  and  Jehudah,  but  these  tribes 
had  each  two  judges,  it  was  now  the  turn  of  the  tribe  of  Ben- 
jamin, from  which  came  the  third  judge,  to  have  again  one  of 
its  sons  elevated  to  the  highest  dignity.  This  consideration 
most  likely,  greatly  influenced  the  electors  in  favor  of  Saul. 
The  appointment  of  Samuel  after  Eli  was  not  on  the  old  prin- 


PERIOD   II.  269 

ciple;  but  here  the  personal  qualities  and  services  of  the 
prophet  seem  to  have  exercised  an  influence  against  the  es- 
tablished policy. 

It  is  evident  that  there  was  an  established  policy  in  this 
respect,  which  they  did  not  change.  They  elected  no  chief  of 
the  house  of  Levi  until  one  of  each  tribe  had  occupied  that 
eminent  position,  because  the  first  judge,  Moses,  was  a  Levite. 
This  policy  was  undoubtedly  established  by  Moses,  who  ap- 
pointed his  successor  from  another  tribe.  The  established 
custom  also  was,  that  the  successor  was  appointed  during  the 
life  of  the  chief  magistrate,  as  the  patriarchs  and  Moses  had 
done,  and  as  we  afterwards  see  David  do;  it  admits,  therefore, 
of  but  little  doubt,  that  this  custom  was  maintained  during  the 
time  of  the  republic.  The  senate  had  a  negative  vote  in  this 
respect,  if  the  one  appointed  was  not  considered  fit  to  fill  the 
office ;  and  tradition  informs  us  that  this  power  was  vested  in 
the  senate,  even  during  the  reign  of  the  Davidian  monarchs, 
with  the  limitation,  that  one  of  the  heirs  of  the  king  was  to 
succeed. 

Hypercritical  historians  have  expressed  doubts  as  to  the 
existence  of  a  national  council  during  the  time  of  the  republic ; 
but  we  do  not  see  why  the  statements  of  Josephus,  of  the 
national  traditions,  which  speak  of  a  senate  during  the  whole 
of  that  time,  and  of  the  biblical  books,  in  which  the  meetings 
of  the  elders  of  Israel  are  mentioned  frequently,  should  be  dis- 
credited, when  the  opposite  side  has  adduced  no  proof  to  the 
contrary.  The  judges  were  dictators  in  time  of  war,  and 
republican  chiefs  in  time  of  peace.  Their  prerogatives,  on  one 
side,  were  limited  by  the  law,  over  the  letter  of  which  the 
priests  watched;  and  on  the  other  side,  by  the  national  coun- 
cil. It  is  not  necessary  to  go  deeper  into  the  subject.  They 
were  the  governors  of  the  nation  according  to  the  laws  of 
Moses,  and  we  know  that  law  already. 

But  our  hypercritical  historians  also  doubt  the  existence  of 
the  law  in  that  time.  We  will,  therefore,  endeavor  to  satisfy 
our  readers  on  the  subject.  There  must  have  been  a  law,  as 
an   agricultural   nation,  living  in  houses  and  fortified  cities, 


270  APPENDIX  TO 

existing  in  a  prosperous  condition  for  the  term  of  three  hun- 
dred and  sixty-five  years,  bravely  defending  the  country  and 
successfully  maintaining  its  independence,  must  have  had  a 
government  and  a  law.  There  was  no  anarchy,  although  the 
royal  author  of  the  last  and  appended  chapters  of  Judges 
is  eager  to  make  us  believe  that  the  time  of  the  republic  was 
a  time  of  anarchy.  Many  years  of  peace  intervened  between 
the  times  of  war  without  any  disturbance  of  the  public  peace 
(the  Abimelech  revolt  and  the  Benjamin  revolt  excepted),  con- 
sequently there  must  have  been  a  law  and  a  government.  The 
author  of  the  story  of  the  concubine  at  Gibeah  (Judges  xix 
xx,  xxi),  concludedjiis  narrative  with  the  words,  "At  those 
days  there  was  no  king  in  Israel,  every  man  did  what  was 
right  in  his  sight.  But  this  would  contradict  his  own  account, 
which  says,  that  the  Benjamites  were  most  rigidly  punished 
for  the  crime  committed  by  some  of  their  sons,  and  for  their 
disobedience  to  the  general  government,  if  there  were  not 
plenty  of  reasons  for  believing  that  this  verse  is  an  addition  of 
some  later  copyist:  who  took  a  mistaken  glossary  remark  for 
a  part  of  the  text.  Verse  twenty-four  is  a  perfect  conclusion 
of  the  narrative,  and  the  absence  of  the  royal  power  is 
remarked  at  the  outset  of  the  piece,  in  the  same  words  as  in 
chapter  xviii.  The  only  books  from  which  we  learn  the  history  , 
of  that  period,  Joshua,  Judges,  and  the  first  chapters  of 
Samuel,  contain  unquestionable  evidences  that  the  authors  of 
those  books  were  well  acquainted  with  the  Pentateuch.  In 
not  a  few  instances  they  copy  literally  from  it.  This  fact  has 
been  admitted  on  all  sides  in  regard  to  the  book  of  Joshua, 
which  represents  itself  in  all  its  particulars  as  a  continuation 
of  the  Pentateuch.  It  is  so,  as  regards  historical  facts  and 
religious  precepts;  so  much  so  indeed  that  we  might  character- 
ize the  book  as  a  narrative  of  the  practical  applications  of  the 
Mosaic  policy  and  polity.  But  the  main  objections  of  the 
authors  we  are  naming  are  to  the  Book  of  Judges.  We  will, 
therefore,  examine  some  of  its  passages,  in  order  to  maintain 
our  position.  In  the  first  two  chapters,  which  are  the  intro- 
duction to  the  book,   constant  reference   is  made  to  the  Penta- 


PERIOD    II.  271 

tench,  i,  16.  We  are  told  that  the  descendants  of  the  father- 
in-law  of  Moses  settled  among  the  people;  and  in  verse  twenty 
it  is  remarked  that  Hebron  was  given  to  Caleb,  as  Moses  had 
said  (Numb,  xiv,  24).  The  address  of  the  angel  (ii,  1-3),  is, 
as  every  reader  must  admit,  an  extract  of  passages  of  the 
Pentateuch.  The  conclusion  of  it  is  almost  literally  copied 
from  Exodus  xxiii,  21.  Verse  10  is  evidently  an  imitation  of 
Exodus  i,  8.  If  we  then  turn  to  the  address  of  the  prophet 
(vi,  8-10),  we  have  another  instance  of  extracts  from  passages 
from  the  Pentateuch.  The  first  passage  is  an  imitation  of  the 
first  verse  of  the  Decalogue.  In  the  conversation  between  the 
angel  and  Gideon,  following  next,  the  narrative  in  Exodus  iii, 
is  perfectly  visible ;  for  we  find  the  angel  encouraging  Gideon 
with  the  same  words  with  which  God  encouraged  Moses  o 
"jo;?  rrnK  "  For  I  will  be  with  thee.-'  Moses  was  encouraged  by 
signs,  and  so  is  Gideon.  Even  the  rod  is  not  forgotten.  Verse 
23  is  an  imitation  of  Genesis  xxxii,  31;  and  verse  39  contains 
precisely  the  same  terms  which  Abraham  addressed  to  God 
(Genesis  xvii,  18),  on  a  similar  occasion.  The  sameness  of 
terms  can  not  be  accidental.  The  message  of  Jephthah  to 
the  king  of  Ammon  (Judges  xi,  15-27)  is  conclusive:  it  is  an 
extract  from  the  Pentateuch,  worded  to  suit  the  occasion.  But 
let  us  proceed  and  consider  one  more  passage  to  this  effect. 
The  story  of  Samson's  mother,  is  entirely  composed  of  passa- 
ges from  the  Pentateuch.  She  is  told  (xiii,  7),  in  the  same 
manner  and  in  the  same  words  as  Hagar,  that  she  would  give 
birth  to  a  son.  Hagar  is  in  the  wilderness,  the  mother  of 
Samson  in  the  field,  when  the  angel  brings  them  the  tidings, 
4<  Behold  thou  art  with  child  and  thou  wilt  bear  a  son."  This 
passage  is  expressly  formed  on  the  one  in  Genesis,  so  that 
even  the  irregulate  yoladt  rrrr  is  in  both  of  them,  while  in 
the  parallel  passage  of  Isaiah  (vii,  14),  it  is  changed  into  yola- 
deth  mS\  Next  comes  the  Mosaic  law  of  the  nazir,  literally 
as  in  Numbers  vi,  1-9.  Verse  18  is  an  exact  copy  of  Genesis 
xxxii,  30;  and  verses  22  and  23  are  imitations  of  Genesis 
xxxii,  31.  As  regards  the  two  appendices  to  the  Book  of 
Judges,  comprising  the  last  five  chapters,  it  is  not  necessary  to 


272  APPENDIX  TO 

remark  that  the  existence  of  the  Pentateuch  is  strongly  visible 
in  them:  xvii,  11,  is  a  literal  copy  of  Exodus  ii,  21.  The 
last  part  of  verse  5  chapter  xix  is  a  paraphrase  of  Genesis 
xviii,  5.  Verses  6  and  7  are  a  paraphrase  of  Genesis  xix,  2,  3, 
as  the  whole  part  of  the  story  when  the  Levite  comes  to 
Gebeah  is  composed  in  the  same  style  as  the  story  of  the  two 
angels  coming  to  Sedom.  This  similarity  becomes  still  more 
glaring  in  verses  22-24.  where  the  host  of  the  Levite  speaks 
almost  the  same  words  as  Lot  spoke  to  the  Sedomites  when 
surrounding  his  house.  The  author  no  doubt  purposely  made 
use  of  the  popular  style  of  Genesis  in  the  story  of  Sedom,  to 
which  the  outrage  of  the  young  men  of  Gibeah  had  so  much 
similarity,  in  order  to  prejudice  the  reader  against  the  Benja- 
mites. 

If  we  next  examine  the  Book  of  Ruth  which  was  undoubtedly 
written  in  a  very  early  period;  as  the  artless  simplicity  and 
purity  of  the  style,  the  naive  representation  of  an  act,  which 
in  another  age  would  have  impaired  the  character  of  a  woman, 
while  it  is  taken  of  Ruth  as  a  noble  virtue  (iii,  8-11),  and  the  brief 
and  expressive  words  in  the  conversation  between  Naomi  and  her 
two  daughters-in-law,  sufficiently  testify.  We  find  in  it  not 
only  reference  to  the  stories  contained  in  Genesis  (iv,  11,  12), 
but  also  the  Mosaic  law  in  regard  to  the  poor,  the  widow  and 
the  stranger,  Ruth  gleaning  ears  on  the  field  of  Boaz  (ii,  2,  7, 
8);  the  sitting  of  the  court  of  justice  in  the  gates  of  the  city 
(iv,  1-4);  the  redemption  of  real  estate  by  a  relative  of  the 
original  owner  (verse  4);  and  the  law  in  regard  to  the  brother's 
widow,  which  is  here  extended  to  the  relative,  who  redeemed  the 
property,  are  precisely  the  same  as  ordained  by  Moses.  It  is 
also  easy  to  find  the  Mosaic  law  in  the  other  books,  especially 
in  Joshua,  as  every  reader  must  admit.  In  Judges,  the  high 
priest,  the  ephod,  the  ark,  the  house  of  the  Lord  at  Shiloh, 
the  aversion  against  idolatry,  the  act  of  asking  the  Lord  by 
the  agency  of  the  high  priest,  the  feasts  of  the  Lord  at  Shiloh, 
and  many  other  facts,  which  are  generally  mentioned  uninten- 
tionally, amount  to  a  demonstration  of  the  existence  of  the 
Mosaic  law.     If  we  extend  this  investigation  to  the  first  ten 


PERIOD    II,  273 

chapters  of  Samuel,  we  obtain  precisely  the  same  result. 
Elkanah,  faithful  to  the  laws  of  Moses,  comes  to  Shiloh  from 
time  to  time  ;  most  likely  three  times  annually,  accompanied 
by  his  family,  to  sacrifice  before  the  Lord  of  Hosts.  Hannah 
promises  solemnly  in  prayer,  that  her  son,  if  God  grant  her 
one,  should  be  a  nazir  as  prescribed  by  the  laws  of  Moses. 
The  acts  of  Hophni  and  Phineas  are  recorded  as  illegal  and 
are  censured  as  such  by  their  father  and  by  a  prophet ;  but 
those  acts,  as  regards  sacrifices,  are  only  illegal  if  the  Mosaic 
code  was  the  law  of  the  nation.  The  ark  of  the  covenant  is 
brought  into  the  camp.  The  people  assemble  before  the  Lord, 
consequently  they  must  have  been  conscious  of  the  mission  of 
the  nation  as  taught  them  by  Moses.  The  prayer  of  Hannah 
is  an  improved  paraphrase  of  the  song  of  Moses,*  Verse  28 
is  an  extract  of  Deutr.  xxxiii,  10.  Verse  33  contains  part  of 
Leviticus  xxvi,  16.  Chapter  iv,  20  and  21  is  a  paraphrase  of 
Genesis  xxxv,  17,  18.  Summing  up  the  evidences  collected  in 
the  previous   pages,  we  arrive  at  the  following  propositions: 

1.  The  Israelitish  nation  can  not  have  existed  as  it  did  with- 
out a  code  of  laws. 

2.  The  Mosaic  laws  and  institutions  are  visible  through  the 
whole  of  the  records  which  give  us  the  history  of  that  age. 

5.  The  sentences  of  the  Pentateuch  are  copied  frequently 
and  paraphrased  by  the  authors  of  those  books.  It  is  there- 
fore evident  that  the  Pentateuch  was  the  written  code  of  laws 
of  that  age.  The  only  question  is  as  to  the  integrity  of  the 
books  mentioned.  But  this,  we  believe,  is  admitted,  on  all 
hands,  as  those  parts  which  could  be  compared  with  the  state- 
ments of  other  authors  were  found  to  be  admirably  correct. 
Our  opponents  can  only  say  in  favor  of  their  views,  that 
actions  are  recorded  in  those  books  that  are  altogether  contrary 
to  the  laws  of  Moses,  and  that  these  actions  could  not  have  oc- 
curred had  the  authority  of  the  law  been  known. 

In  refutation  of  this  feeble  argument  it  may  suffice  to  remark, 
that  while  the  relation  of  the  illegal  actions  committed  prove 
the  truth  and  candor  of  the  historian,  the  commission  of  those 

*  Compare  I  Samuel  ii,  1-10  with  Deutr.  xxxii. 
18 


274  APPENDIX    TO 

actions  does  not  establish  the  non-existence  of  the  law.  None 
will  doubt  the  existence  of  the  codes  of  Theodosius  and  Justi- 
nius  during  the  middle  ages,  although  they  were  violated 
continually,  and  by  the  highest  class  of  society,  whose  duty  it 
would  have  been  to  protect  and  to  enforce  those  laws,  [n 
truth,  all  law  is  at  times  violated.  And  so  we  may  conclude 
that  though  the  acts  of  Abimelech,  of  Jephthah,  and  of  Sam- 
son were  grossly  criminal,  yet  it  affords  not  the  slightest  proof 
that  the  Mosaic  code  was  not  in  existence,  or  that  it  was  not 
the  law  of  the  land. 

Knowing  that  the  laws  of  Moses  were  the  national  code  at 
that  period,  it  becomes  unnecessary  to  make  any  further 
remarks  respecting  them.  We  shall,  however,  notice  the  legal 
customs  which  we  meet  with  in  this  period.  In  Joshua  xxii, 
12,  we  are  informed,  that  the  national  council,  being  also  the 
supreme  tribunal  of  justice,  took  cognizance  of  the  erection 
of  a  monument  on  the  Jordan  by  the  two  tribes  and  a  half 
beyond  that  river.  This  was  supposed  to  be  high  treason.  A 
cotirt  of  inquiry,  consisting  of  ten  senators  from  ten  different 
tribes  and  the  son  of  the  high  priest — his  proxy — were  appointed 
to  investigate  the  subject.  They  proceeded  to  the  other  side  of 
Jordan,  and  finding  the  accusation  to  be  unfounded  brought  the 
report  to  the  national  council,  which  suspended  the  cause.  In 
Judges  xx,  we  are  informed  of  another  cause,  brought  before 
the  same  body  against  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  the  same  pro- 
cedure took  place.  But  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  the  accused 
and  convicted  party,  not  yielding  to  the  judgment  of  the  na- 
tional council,  they  were  severely  punished.  In  Judges  xxi, 
we  read  of  another  case  of  a  similar  nature,  which  ended  with 
the  punishment  of  the  inhabitants  of  Jabash  Gilead.  These 
cases  show  us,  that  the  Mosaic  law  in  regard  to  the  supreme 
tribunal  of  justice  was  then  understood  in  the  following 
manner : 

1.  The  supreme  court  had  original  and  final  jurisdiction  over 
the  tribes  in  cases  of  high  treason,  and  in  cases  of  the  violation 
of  fundamental  laws  by  individuals,  if  the  tribe  in  whose  ter- 
ritory it  occurred  had  not  properly  recognized  it. 


PERIOD   II.  275 

2.  That  body  had  the  same  jurisdiction  over  cities  and  dis- 
tricts, which  neglected  to  send  their  representatives  to  the 
national  council;  which  was  held  to  be  open  rebellion  against 
the  union  of  Israel. 

3.  The  accused  parties  were  not  summoned  to  appear  before 
the  national  council  until  a  court  of  inquiry  appointed  by  that 
body  had  investigated  the  subject  in  the  territory  of  the  tribe, 
or  in  the  city  of  the  individual  standing  accused  of  such  crimi- 
nal actions,  and  until  that  court  had  reported  to  the  national 
council.  Excepted  of  this  previous  inquisition  were  the  dis- 
tricts which  neglected  to  send  their  representatives  to  the 
national  council,  they  were  deemed  guilty  by  the  non-compliance 
with  the  fundamental  laws. 

4.  If  the  court  of  inquiry  found  the  accused  parties  guilty, 
it  became  the  duty  of  the  respective  tribe  to  deliver  up  the 
transgressors  to  the  national  council,  to  receive  the  sentence  of 
the  law.  In  case  of  neglect  the  national  council  was  entitled 
to  declare  such  tribe  or  tribes  in  a  state  of  siege,  and  take 
active  measures  to  enforce  obedience.* 

As  regards  the  convocation  of  the  national  council,  it  ap- 
pears to  have  /been  the  practice,  that  besides  meeting  three 
times  a  year,  the  chief  magistrate  had  the  privilege  to  call  a 
meeting.!  Such  extra  meeting  could  be  held  at  anyplace  before 
the  Lord,  that  is,  within  the  limits  of  the  land  of  Palestine, 
while  the  regular  sessions  were  at  the  place  of  the  national 
sanctuary.  As  regards  military  service,  it  was  the  chief  magis- 
trate's duty  to  call  out  the  warriors  of  one  or  more  tribes,  or  a 
certain  proportion  of  them,  if  the  national  council  decreed  it. 
We  find  but  a  few  remarks  on  new  customs  in  the  civil  law. 
In  Ruth  iv,  7,  we  learn  the  form  of  a  verbal  contract.  He  who 
sold  a  property,  or  resigned  a  right,  signified  his  intention 
before  a  court  and  witnesses  by  putting  off  his  sandal  from  his 
foot.  But  this  custom  is  mentioned  in  one  case  in  the  Mosaic 
law  {Deutr.  xxv,  9).  There  we  learn  that  a  widow,  who  had 
no  children,  could  be  claimed  by  the  next  relative,  if  the  other 

*  Deutr.  xiii,  13-19;  xvii,  12.  13. 

t  Joshua  xxiii,  2;  xxiv,  1;  I  Samuel  x.  17. 


276  APPENDIX    TO 

heirs  of  the  husband  were  either  dead  or  unwilling  to  do  so, 
such  a  marriage,  if  consented  to  by  both  parties,  had  the  pecu- 
liarity, that  the  first  male  issue  of  that  matrimony  was  considered 
by  law  the  legal  heir  of  all  the  rights  and  claims  of  the  deceased 
husband,  as  in  the  Mosaic  law,  in  case  of  taking  a  brother's 
wife  (vide  page  145). 

II.  RELIGION  AND  IDOLATRY. 

What  has  been  said  above  in  regard  to  the  laws  of  Moses 
decides  definitely  that  the  religion  of  Moses  was  the  religion  of 
the  state,  while  all  sorts  of  deviations  from  that  religion  were 
stigmatized  as  rebellion  towards  the  Sovereign  Ruler  of  the 
nation. 

The  Israelitish  people  came  from  Egypt,  the  mother  country 
of  idolatry  and  superstition.  To  it  Greece  and  Rome  were 
indebted  for  their  gods  and  their  peculiar  theology.  Moses 
opposed  the  Egyptian  superstitions  with  all  the  means  at  his 
command,  and,  marvellous  enough,  succeeded  in  dethroning  the 
gods  of  Egypt  among  the  Israelites.  No  trace  is  found  in  this 
history,  that  Isis  or  Osiris,  Kneph  or  Neitha,  or  any  other 
Egyptian  god  was  worshiped  in  Israel.  But  it  was  easier  to 
dethrone  the  heathen  gods  than  to  uproot  the  causes  which  led 
to  worship  them.  In  this,  neither  Moses  nor  Joshua,  nor  any 
one  of  the  judges  after  him,  Samuel  excepted,  could  succeed. 
The  chiefs  of  the  republic  offered  resistance  to  the  practice  of 
idolatry,  and  they  succeeded  in  suppressing  it  in  public ;  but 
they  were  unable  to  extend  the  severity  of  the  law  into  the 
recesses  of  private  families,  and  to  uproot  the  causes  which 
produced  that  propensity  among  all  nations  of  antiquity. 

It  is  necessary  for  us  to  investigate  those  causes,  the  phe- 
nomena of  which  had  become  so  general  among  the  ancient 
nations.  It  has  been  stated  before  (p.  134),  that  cosmogony 
was  the  basis  of  all  ancient  religions,  to  which  end  the  causes 
of  natural  phenomena  were  sought  and  supposed  to  be  the 
Deity  itself.  The  natural  man  has  before  him  nothing  but 
concrete  ideas  and  tangible  objects.  The  ideas  of  the  existence 
of  a  supreme  being,  of  the  duty  of  man  to  worship  that  being, 


PKRIOD-II.  277 

of  the  immortality  of  the  human  mind,  of  the  preference  due  to 
justice  before  injustice,  are  innate  with  man;  he  is  in  pos- 
session of  those  ideas  without  being  conscious  of  them,  and  lie 
becomes  aware  of  them  without  any  instruction  from  without. 
Therefore  we  tind  them  prevalent  in  all  ages  and  in  all  heathen 
creeds.  They  form  the  sum  and  substance  of  primitive  re- 
ligion, and  may  properly  be  termed  the  original  knowledge  of 
the  mind.  These  ideas  must  have  been  concrete  with  the 
earlier  nations,  and  therefore,  they  made  them  tangible;  they 
surrounded  them  with  a  form  in  order  to  be  able  to  compre- 
hend their  own  ideas.  The  doctrine  of  immortality  could  be 
understood  only  in  the  form  of  resurrection  of  the  body  or 
transmigration  of  the  soul.  God  himself  was  embodied;  this 
body  was  represented  by  different  signs,  names,  and  hiero- 
glyphics, as  the  one  or  the  other  imagined  the  Deity,  although 
no  image  was  made  of  the  Supreme  Being.  Ceremonies  were 
invented  to  please  the  Most  High,  and  persons  appointed  to 
minister  at  his  temples,  altars,  groves,  or  heights,  or  whatever 
places  being  devoted  to  that  purpose.  This  not  only  had  a 
certain  charm  for  the  childish  imagination  of  juvenile  nations, 
but  it  also  gave,  at  the  same  time,  satisfaction  to  the  religious 
yearning  of  the  heart.  Still  it  held  the  intellect  within  narrow 
limits,  and  secured  to  imagination  the  dominion  over  the  intel- 
lectual powers. 

They  could  not  imagine  the  Supreme  Being  without  a  host  of 
ministering  spirits.  Nothing  could  appear  more  worthy  of 
being  the  ministers  of  the  Deity,  and  nothing  could  exercise  a 
deeper  influence  upon  the  lofty  imagination  of  the  ancients, 
than  the  bright  luminaries  which  adorn  the  ethereal  blue  of 
heaven.  Those  ministers  of  the  Deity,  which  were  believed 
to  be  pure  intellects,  were  worshiped,  in  order  to  procure 
their  favor  and  their  intercession  with  the  Supreme  Being,  as 
also  to  enjoy  their  favor  in  the  different  departments  of  their 
government  of  the  universe.  Temples  and  altars  were  reared 
to  them;  representations  of  them  were  held  up  to  public 
adoration;  priests  were  appointed  to  their  service,  and  feasts 
were  celebrated  in  their  honor.     The  primitive  idea  was  grad- 


278  APPENDIX    TO 

ually  forgotten,  and  they  became  celestial  gods,  interior  to,  and 
in  some  respects  independent  of  the  Supreme  Being. 

After  man  had  observed  the  beneficent  influences  of  some  of 
the  forces  of  nature  upon  the  prosperity  of  man,  and,  on  the 
other  side,  the  destructive  influence  of  other  forces,  he  was  led 
to  believe  the  existence  of  terrestrial  gods,  both  good  and  evil 
ones.  But  as  the  influence  of  the  celestial  bodies  upon  this  sub- 
lunar world  was  soon  observed,  the  terrestrial  gods  were  thought 
inferior  to  the  celestial  deities ;  but  they  also  were  personified 
and  represented  by  different  images,  and  to  them  temples  and 
altars  were  reared,  priests  appointed,  a  mode  of  worship  in- 
vented, and  feasts  instituted. 

The  forces  of  nature  were  soon  divided  into  two  principal 
classes,  viz:  the  generative  and  the  prolific,  the  two  principles 
of  which  were  supposed  to  be  vested  in  sun  and  moon.  There- 
fore the  gods,  the  Supreme  Being  excepted,  were  represented  in 
couples,  male  and  female,  Baal  and  Astarte,  Isis  and  Osiris, 
Kneph  and  Neitha,  Jupiter  and  Juno,  Brahma  and  Brahmina,  &c. 

This  idea  led  gradually  to  another  one.  If  the  gods  were 
the  generative  and  prolific  powers,  they  must  be  the  prototypes 
of  all  animate  beings.  Man  must  be  the  image  of  one  god, 
while  the  lion,  the  ox,  the  bear,  and  every  other  animal  must 
be  the  images  of  other  gods.  But  as  there  is  not  seldom  a 
sameness  of  qualities  in  man  and  many  other  animate  beings, 
there  must  be  certain  gods,  who  are  the  prototypes  of  different 
kinds  of  beings.  There  was  no  difficulty,  then,  in  representing 
deities;  every  animal  or  vegetable,  or  even  their  representa- 
tions, every  man  or  his  image,  was  also  a  representation  of  a 
deity.  The  superior  gods  could  be  represented  only  by  a  com- 
pound of  members  of  the  bodies  of  different  beings.  The 
onion  and  other  vegetables,  the  ox,  the  lion,  the  dog,  the 
sheep,  and  every  other  animal,  were  sacred  to  that  god,  whose 
representation  they  were.  This  was  Feticism,  the  worship  of 
animals  and  vegetables,  common  among  the  Egyptians.  It 
was  not  the  animal  or  vegetable  itself  whir.h  they  worshipped, 
but  their  prototypes ;  their  deities  were  the  universe  in  abstracio, 
and  the  universe  was  to  them  the  gods  in  concrete.     It  was  a 


PERIOD    II.  279 

dualistic  pantheism.  Every  well-organized  man,  animal  or 
vegetable,  could  become  a  subject  of  divine  adoration,  because 
it  represented  perfectly  its  prototype,  a  god. 

Zabiism  is  derived  from  the  Hebrew,  X2i*  host.  The 
admirers  of  that  system  were  called  so,  not  on  account  of  wor- 
shipping  a  host  of  gods,  but  on  account  of  worshiping  the 
hosts  of  heaven,  to  which  that  Hebrew  term  related  almost 
exclusively.  The  theory  of  Zabiism  was  the  same  with  Feti- 
cism;  they  only  went  one  step  beyond  the  theory  of  Feticism. 
Being  accustomed  to  look  upon  the  celestial  bodies  as  divine 
beings,  the  figures  of  different  animals  were  descried  in  the 
groups  of  stars,  according  to  which  the}'  were  called.  The 
influence  of  those  bodies  upon  the  sublunar  world  was  known; 
therefore  the  prototypes  of  all  animate  beings,  the  gods,  were 
descried  in  the  stars,  and  the  operative  forces  of  nature  were 
considered  as  inferior  and  ministering  divinities,  who  are  in- 
carnated in  the  material  beings  or  disembodied  by  order  of  the 
celestial  gods. 

The  Greeks  went  one  step  beyond  the  original  Feticism  and 
Zabiism  combined.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  our  plan  to 
comment  on  it. 

If  the  gods  were  the  prototypes  of  material  beings,  nature  in 
abstracto,  they  must  be  possessed  of  all  the  qualities  and 
passions  of  those  beings.  Therefore  each  quality  of  the  mind 
and  each  human  passion  had  its  tutelar  deity,  which  was  wor- 
shiped by  the  exercise  of  such  a  quality  or  by  indulging  in 
such  a  passion.  There  was  a  god  of  wisdom  and  of  folly,  of 
purity  and  impurity  of  sentiments.  While  one  god  was  ho- 
nored by  ascetie  practices,  the  other  one  found  pleasure  in  lubric 
and  luxuriant  enjoyments;  and  while  the  one  divinity  indulged 
in  peace,  the  other  one  presided  over  war. 

The  origination  of  idolatry,  or  the  corruption  of  primitive 
religion  must  be  ascribed  chiefly  to  two  causes. 

1,  To  the  inability  of  the  natural  man  to  form  abstract 
ideas,  and 

2.  To  the  propensity  of  man  to  indulge  in  his  passions. 
The  universe  was    deified   to  the  pagan.     He  found  a   god 


280  APPENDIX    TO 

everywhere.  This  theology  was  too  pleasing  to  the  lofty  im- 
agination of  the  ancients ;  it  gave  too  much  satisfaction  to  the 
religious  wants  of  man,  not  to  impress  itself  deeply  upon  the 
mind  of  the  nations  of  antiquity,  who  were  juvenile,  poetical 
and  gay.  It  was  the  product  of  imagination,  and  suited  to  the 
imagination.  It  also  was  too  pleasing  to  the  sensual  nature  of 
man,  to  have  not  only  an  excuse  for  indulging  freely  in  his 
passions,  but  also  to  obtain  a  divine  sanction  to  it,  that  it 
should  not  have  captivated  the  millions  of  thoughtless  and 
sensual  beings.  However  dissimilar  were  the  pagan  creeds  of 
different  countries,  in  these  points  they  harmonized. 

The  religion  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  was  an  entirely  new 
system.  It  opposed  the  operations  of  imagination  and  the 
dominion  of  sensuality,  because  both  were  inseparably  con- 
nected. Its  principle  is  "Be  ye  holy  for  the  Lord  your  God  is 
holy."  On  every  side  there  were  mementos  against  sin, 
exhortations  to  holiness,  threatenings  of  judgment  to  the 
rebellious,  and  promises  of  salvation  only  on  the  condition  of 
holiness.  Pure  morals  and  an  absolute  dominion  over  brutal 
passions  were  demanded  of  the  worshipers  of  Jehovah;  while 
the  heathen  gods  promised  to  supply  their  worshipers  with 
"wild  grapes,"  which  Israel,  like  the  other  nations,  loved 
(Hosea  iii,  1).  Joshua  therefore  told  them  "  Ye  can  not  serve 
the  Lord,  for  he  is  a  holy  God,  he  is  a  jealous  God,  he  will  not 
bear  (not  sanction)  your  trangressions  and  your  sins."  The 
Israelites  intermarried  with  the  aborigines  of  Canaan;  they 
traded  with  the  Phoenicians,  came  in  contact  with  Ammonites, 
Moabites  and  Edomites ;  they  were  attracted  by  the  pleasing 
satisfaction  which  paganism  offered  to  the  sensual  nature,  and 
they  worshiped  the  gods  of  their  wives  and  of  their  neighbors, 
as  Moses,  well  aware  of  human  propensities,  had  predicted 
(Deutr.  xxxi,  16).  The  religion  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation 
taught,  that  God  is  a  perfect  and  pure  spirit,  who  alone 
created,  governs  and  preserves  the  universe.  No  image  can  be 
made  of  him.  Neither  the  luminaries  of  heaven  nor  the  forces 
of  nature  represent  him  who  can  not  be  represented.  All 
nature   is   but   the  work  of  his  will,  affording    us    the  facts 


PERIOD   II.  281 

wherewith  to  learn  his  government,  but  not  his  essence  nor  his 
nature.  This  sublime  idea  is  in  itself  too  abstract,  too  far 
beyond  the  horizon  of  the  concrete  and  natural  man.  A  large 
portion  of  the  Israelites  could  not  comprehend  it.  The  taber- 
nacle of  the  congregation  was  insufficient  to  satisfy  the  lofty 
imagination  of  the  multitude,  who  lived  distant  from  it.  The 
gods  of  the  heathens  were  visible  everywhere;  the  yearning 
heart  found  satisfaction;  the  altars  on  the  heights  could  be 
used  to  the  service  of  any  god;  and  it  was  natural  that  they 
should  worship  the  gods  of  the  heathens  without  denying  the 
superiority  of  Jehovah,  the  Supreme  Being,  for  whom  the 
heathens  had  but  different  names. 

We  read  (Judges  xvii,  3)  of  the  strange  practice  of  Micha's 
mother,  who  made  an  idol  and  its  utensils  of  the  silver  which 
she  had  devoted  to  Jehovah.  This  peculiar  inconsistency 
appears  especially  clear  in  the  words  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  vii). 
He  exhorted  the  people  to  worship  Jehovah  alone.  "  And  the 
children  of  Israel  put  away  the  Baals,  and  the  Astaroth,  and 
worshiped  Jehovah  alone."  Whenever  a  misfortune  overtook 
the  nation,  they  returned  to  God,  which  in  itself  proves  that 
Jehovah  was  worshiped  as  the  Supreme  God.  But  the  gods  of 
the  heathens  also  were  thought  fit  objects  of  adoration,  so 
that  the  prophet  could  say,  "And  I  have  told  you,  I  am  the 
Lord  your  God,  you  shall  not  fear  the  god  of  the  Emorites  in 
whose  land  you  dwell;  but  you  heard  not  my  voice"  (Judges, 
vi,  10). 

Another  cause  of  idolatry,  mentioned  before,  was  undoubt- 
edly the  reverence  attached  to  certain  persons,  whose  images 
were  kept  in  the  houses  and  temples,  and  to  monuments,  which 
commemorated  great  events  and  great  men.  Time  transformed 
the  true  story  into  fables,  and  the  image  or  monument  became 
the  more  important,  the  more  luxuriantly  it  was  supplied  with 
myths.  Popular  superstitions  finally  brought  it  in  a  direct 
connection  with  the  one  or  the  other  god  whose  name  it  main- 
tained. 

Frequent  mention  is  made  of  such  monuments  in  sacred 
history;    there  were    the  stones  which  Joshua  erected  in  the 


282  APPENDIX    TO 

Jordan,  of  which  the  writer  of  the  book  says  that  they  were 
still  there  in  his  time  {Joshua  iv,  9) ;  those  which  he  erected  at 
Gilgal;  the  heap  of  stones  on  the  body  of  Achar,  also  existing 
in  the  time  of  the  author  of  Joshua  (vii,  26),  which  was  the  case 
with  the  heap  of  stones  on  the  body  of  the  king  of  Ai  (viii. 
29);  the  altar  on  mouut  Ebal;  the  large  stones  at  the  mouth  of 
the  cave  of  Makcdah  (x,  27);  the  monument  erected  by  the 
eastern  tribes  (xxii,  10);  the  stone  set  up  by  Joshua  under  the 
oak  at  Shechem,  and  the  monument  of  Gideon  (Judges  viii,  27). 
It  must  be  remembered,  that  rude  stones  were  the  lirst  idols  of 
almost  all  nations  of  antiquity,  undoubtedly  for  the  same 
reason  as  mentioned  before,  as  the  stones  were  their  sacred 
scriptures,  eternizing  events.  The  sacred  historian  expressly 
mentions,  that  the  monument  of  Gideon  was  worshiped  (ibid). 

That  the  term  teraphim  signifies  a  bust,  or  a  complete  image 
of  one  of  the  family,  is  sufficiently  proved  by  the  following 
passage  in  J  Samuel,  xix,  13,  "And  Michal  took  the  teraphim 
and  laid  them  in  the  bed,  and  put  a  pillow  of  goat's  hair  for 
their  bolster,  and  covered  them  with  the  cloth."  The  word 
teraphim  is  with  the  definite  n,  which  points  to  well  known 
teraphim.  The  whole  contrivance  was  to  delude  the  messen- 
gers of  Saul  coming  to  arrest  David,  by  making  them  believe 
David  was  lying  sick  in  the  bed.  It  must  therefore  have  been 
a  bust  or  an  image  of  David.  That  these  family  busts  or 
images  were  worshiped  is  evident  from  many  passages  of  the 
Bible,  especially  Judges  xvi,  5. 

The  pesel,  so  often  mentioned  in  connection  with  idolatry, 
was  supposed  to  signify  an  effigy.  But  We  have  a  positive 
definition  of  the  nature  of  that  effigy  in  the  words  tisnti  Sds  "imi- 
tation of  the  ephod"  (Judges  xviii,  18).  The  ephod  was  an  im- 
portant part  of  the  high  priest's  clothes,  because  it  is  mentioned 
first  in  Moses's  description  of  the  garments  of  the  priest  (Exod. 
xxviii,  6).  It  was  deemed  indispensably  necessary  to  those  who 
executed  the  clerical  functions  (I  Sam.  ii,  18),  and  the  priest 
was  frequently  called  113K  KBn:,  "  One  who  wears  an  ephod." 
Undoubtedly  a  vast  deal  of  marvelous  power  was  attributed  to 
it  by  the  superstitious    multitude,    and    thus    it  was   deemed 


PERIOD    II.  28)4 

necessary  also  in  the  idolatrous  temples.  Gideon  made  one  of 
gold,  in  which,  no  doubt,  the  twelve  names  of  the  tribes  of 
Israel  were  engraved,  as  upon  the  Mosaic  ephod,  to  represent 
the  union  of  the  nation.  But  the  idea  originally  connected 
with  it  finally  turned  it  to  a  sacred  relic,  and  at  last  it  became 
an  object  of  adoration.  It  can  not  be  denied,  that  pesel  signi- 
fies any  kind  of  eiiigy;  but  from  the  above  it  seems  that  it  sig- 
nified then  but  the  imitation  of  the  ephod. 

Masechah  signifies  a  molten  image;  but  we  do  not  know  of 
what  original.  Were  we  permitted  to  judge  of  it  ,as  of  the 
teraphim,  we  might  say  that  it  represented  the  great  men  of 
the  nation.  In  the  house  of  Micah  it  probably  represented 
Moses  or  some  other  father  of  the  nation. 

Another  cause  of  idolatry  among  Israel  seems  to  have  been 
this.  The  nations  who  intended  to  cultivate  friendly  relations 
with  Israel,  or  those  who  designed  to  make  war  upon  them, 
propagated  their  religious  doctrines  among  the  Israelites, 
which  assisted  them  in  obtaining  a  friendly  party  in  that  nation. 
Patriotism  and  the  worship  of  one's  god  was  then  thought 
identical.  To  desert  the  national  gods  was  high  treason  in 
Greece  and  in  Rome,  and  to  worship  the  national  divinities 
was  a  demonstration  of  attachment  to  those  countries.  Jehovah 
was  not  worshiped  as  the  Most  High  only,  but  also  as  the  na- 
tional Deity.  Hence,  for  an  Israelite  to  worship  foreign  gods 
was  to  sympathize  with  foreign  nations  at  the  expense  of  his 
own  country.  The  Israelites  did  not  for  a  long  time  worship 
the  Dagon  of  the  Phelistines,  because  they  never  sympathised 
with  that  nation.  But  no  sooner  did  they  begin  to  pay  homage 
to  the  gods  of  Phelistia  and  Ammon,  than  those  nations  made 
war  upon  them  (Judges  x,  6,  7).  It  appears  that  Israelites 
worshiping  the  gods  of  a  certain  country  refused  to  do  military 
service  against  the  armies  of  such  a  country.  Therefore, 
Gideon  first  of  all  destroyed  the  altar  of  Baal,  and,  before 
attacking  the  enemy,  rejected  all  such  warriors  as  could  not 
clear  themselves  of  the  suspicion  of  being  Baa]   worshipers.* 

*  Compare  Numbers  xxv,  1-6  to  xxxi. 


I 
284  APPENDIX   TO 

This  also  accounts  for  the  prudent  language  of  Jephthah  in  his 
address  to  the  king  of  Amnion  (Judges  xi,  2:5.  24),  maintaining 
that  what  Jehovah  had  given  to  Israel  belonged  to  them,  and 
what  Kemosh  had  given  to  Amnion  belonged  to  them.  He  had 
in  his  army  Israelitish  Kemosh  worshipers,  who  would  have 
admitted  the  claims  of  Ammon  if  substantiated  by  the  will  of 
Kemosh.  Jephthah,  therefore,  maintained  that  Kemosh  had 
not  given  to  Ammon  the  part  of  land  which  was  claimed. 

The  history  of  idolatry  among  the  Israelites  at  this  period 
may  be  said  to  be  this.  Families  living  distant  from  Shiloh, 
erected  for  themselves  a  sort  of  family  halls,  similar  to  the 
ancestral  halls  of  the  Chinese,  in  which  were  imitations  of 
the  ephod,  family  images,  or  busts,  and  the  molten  images  or 
effigies  of  illustrious  men.  By  their  amalgamation  with  the 
aborigines,  and  their  intercourse  with  neighboring  nations,  they 
learned  the  doctrines  and  rites  of  Zabiism,  which  some  adopted 
in  addition  to  the  Supreme  God  of  the  lanci,  on  account  of  the 
sensual  enjoyment  connected  with  those  rites,  and  others 
adopted  them  on  account  of  the  satisfaction  they  afforded  to 
the  lofty  imagination  of  the  unenlightened.  Becoming  thus 
accustomed  to  idolatry,  they  also  worshiped  the  images  and 
busts  of  the  departed,  and  the  monuments  of  former  ages.  That 
the  knowledge  of  Jehovah  and  the  Mosaic  law  spread  among 
other  nations,  in  the  same  ratio  as  Zabiism  spread  among  the 
Israelites,  is  a  fact  which  we  shall  attempt  to  prove  in  another 
place. 

It  is  next  for  us  to  show,  that  Zabiism  was  not  as  general 
among  the  Israelites  at  this  period  as  is  generally  supposed. 
The  government,  as  we  have  seen  before,  was  always  opposed 
to  a  deviation  from  the  laws  of  Moses,  as  is  seen  plainly  ex- 
pressed in  the  address  of  Joshua  (xxiv,  23);  in  the  brief  notice 
of  the  government '  of  Othniel,  son  of  Kenaz  (Judges  iii,  9), 
and  of  the  inspired  Deborah  (iv,  3);  in  the  first  act  of  Gideon, 
destroying  the  altar  of  Baal  (vi,  27),  and  especially  in  the 
address  of  Samuel  (I  Samuel  vii,  3-5).  If  the  party  addicted 
to  Zabiism  had  been  as  numerous  as  some  historians  believe, 
they  would  certainly  have  at  least  endeavored  to  change  the 


PERIOD  II.  285 

government  in  their  favor.  Only  once  wo  are  informed,  that 
the  Baal  worshipers  succeeded  in  effecting  a  revolution.  They 
assisted  Abimelech  (Judges  ix,  4)  to  slay  his  brothers,  and  to 
proclaim  himself  king ;  but  their  power  was  soon  crushed  forever. 
A  second  evidence  to  this  effect  is  the  fact  that  all  the  public 
meetings  noticed  during  this  period  were  before  Jehovah,  and 
that  all  the  public  speakers  are  called  either  prophets,  who 
speak  in  the  name  of  God,  or  angels,  messengers  of  the  Lord. 
And  we  mid  also  the  rough  Jephthah,  when  receiving  his  mis- 
sion from  the  hands  of  the  people,  declaring  himself  before 
Jehovah  at  Mizpah  (Judges  xi,  11).  The  customs  of  the  nation 
as  we  find  them,  are  another  strong  evidence  to  this  effect.  The 
common  salutation  of  that  age  was,  "Jehovah  be  with  thee," 
or  with  you.  To  this  the  answer  was,  "Jehovah  bless  thee,-* 
The  daughters  of  Israel  celebrated,  from  time  to  time,  most 
likely  three  times  a  year,  a  feast  of  the  Lord  at  Shiloh  (Judges 
xxi,  19).  The  people  came  to  Shiloh  to  sacrifice  to  the  Lord 
(I  Samuel  i,  3;  ii,  12,  22).  And,  finally,  it  must  be  observed, 
that  the  only  poetical  compositions  which  we  possess  of  that 
age,  the  song  of  Deborah  (Judges  v),  and  the  prayer  of  Hannah 
(I  Samuel  ii),  are  written  in  a  purely  religious  spirit.  If  we 
were  not  in  possession  of  all  the  facts  as  quoted,  we  would  still 
be  obliged  to  maintain  that  Zabiism  was  not  common  among 
the  Israelites  at  the  period  in  question;  for  it  is  certainly 
unphilosophical  to  suppose  so  sudden  a  transition  in  history, 
as  the  spirit  of  the  age  of  David  would  form  to  the  period  of 
the  Judges,  if  then  true  religion  had  been  altogether  or  chiefly 
neglected.  The  truth  is,  that  Zabiism  was  the  family  religion, 
and  its  rites,  most  likely,  were  performed  in  secret  by  many 
Israelitish  families;  that  the  people  of  Shechem  once  openly 
revolted  and  set  up  a  king  and  the  Baal  of  Berytha,  which  was 
soon  after  crushed;  that  the  government  opposed  those  prac- 
tices but  not  with  sufficient  vigor;  that  the  Levites  were  no 
less  exposed  to  the  corruptions  of  the  age  than  other  people ; 
and  that  the  religion  of  Moses  continued  to  be  not  only  the 
religion  of  the  state,  but  also  of  the  vast  majority  of  the  people. 

*  Judges  vi,  12  •,  Ruth  ii,  4. 


286  APPENDIX    TO 

The  fact,  that  all  the  national  misfortunes  were  ascribed  to  the 
foreign  worship  is  in  itself  an  evidence  of  the  high  regard  then 
entertained  for  the  religion  of  Moses,  which  is  no  less  evident 
in  the  act  of  bringing  the  ark  of  the  covenant  into  the  camp  in 
order  to  obtain  the  victory  (I  Samuel  vi,  3).  The  progress 
of  the  Mosaic  institutions  during  this  period  was  considerable. 
At  first  they  were  a  mere  theory,  but  now  they  were  identified 
with  the  existence  and  the  happiness  of  the  nation,  and  the 
people  had  become  conscious  of  this  fact.  The  idolatrous 
party  was  a  corrupted  opposition,  the  like  of  which  we  meet 
in  the  history  of  every  nation  ancient  and  modern. 

III.  LITERATURE. 

It  is  obvious,  that  the  art  of  writing  was  known  and  practiced 
in  this  period  of  our  history,  from  the  following  passages : 
Joshua  wrote  the  Deuteronomy  upon  the  stones  of  the  altar, 
and  then  he  read  to  the  people  portions  of  the  law  (Joshua, 
viii,  32-34).  He  proposed  to  the  national  council  to  appoint 
three  men  of  each  tribe  to  travel  and  describe  the  country. 
The  proposition  was  agreed  to,  and  the  men  appointed  to  this 
duty  traveled  and  described  the  cities  in  a  book  (Joshua  xviii). 
It  would  appear  that  they  had  some  knowledge  of  geometry. 
Joshua  also  wrote  his  last  speech,  and  the  covenant  renewed 
with  Israel,  into  the  book  of  the  law  of  the  Lord  (xxiv,  25). 
Deborah  spoke  of  students  of  the  law  in  the  family  of  Machir, 
and  of  dexterous  scribes  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulon  (Judges  v,  14), 
Samuel  wrote  the  royal  constitution  in  a  book  which  was  laid 
up  before  the  Lord  (I  Samuel  x,  25).  However  late  these 
books  may  have  been  written,  it  is  unreasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  authors  would  have  ventured  to  mention  the  art  of 
writing  in  connection  with  an  age,  if  they  had  not  been  sure 
that  this  art  was  practiced  at  the  stated  period.  The  written 
monuments  and  documents  especially,  which  the  authors  of 
Joshua  and  Judges  mention,  are  a  conclusive  evidence  to  this 
effect,  as  it  is  most  likely,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  that  those 
were  partly  the  basis  of  the  works  in  our  possession. 

There  are  three  passages  in  the  book   of  Joshua  which  de- 


PERIOD    II.  287 

serve  particular  notice.  The  first  occurs  chap.  xv.  13,  where 
the  author  mentions  the  singular  fact,  that  the  sun  and  moon 
stood  still  at  the  request  of  Joshua;  in  proof  of  his  narrative, 
lie  quotes  a  passage  from  the  book  Jashar,  where  it  was  writ- 
ten. "And  the  sun  stood  in  the  midst  of  the  heaven,  and  he 
hastened  not  to  set  as  on  every  other  day."  This  informs  us 
that  the  author  made  use  of  a  written  source,  which  we  do  not 
possess.  The  book  Jashar  must  have  consisted  of  a  collection 
of  songs,  as  the  term  jashar  (I  will  sing)  implies;  and  as  the 
passages  quoted  from  it  both  here  and  II  Samuel,  xvii,  27, 
plainly  indicate,  all  of  which  arc  written  in  the  poetic  style 
and  metre.  Popular  songs  were  made  among  all  nations  of 
antiquity  to  celebrate  important  events  in  the  history  of  the 
nation;  among  the  Israelites  also  such  songs  were  made  and 
written  in  a  book.  This  last  term,  however,  deserves  a  par- 
ticular consideration.  12D,  a  book,  can  signify  only  a  collection 
of  narratives,  as  the  term  is  derived  from  sirpper,  to  count,  to 
narrate;  the  ancients  did  not  use  terms  in  their  secondary 
meaning;  the  book  Jashar  must  have  been  a  collection  of  his- 
torical poems,  such  as  Psalms  lxxviii,  cv,  cvi,  and  others;  the 
two  songs  of  Moses,  the  passage  quoted  from  the  book  Milha- 
moth  (Numbers  xxi,  14-20)  and  the  like.  It  was  customary 
among  all  nations  of  antiquity,  that  authors  deposited  their 
books  in  temples,  trusting  them  to  the  custody  of  priests 
(Strabo,  lib.  xiv,  p.  734,  ed.  Xyland).  Sanchoniathan,  when 
writing  his  history  of  Phoenicia,  found  the  materials  for  it  in 
the  secret  recesses  of  the  temples  (Euset.  Praeb.  Evang.  I,  9). 
In  like  manner  the  kings  of  Sparta  preserved  the  prophecies  of 
the  state  (Arist.  vol.  iii,  9;  Herodot.  vi,  57).  In  Athens  also  the 
sacred  writings  were  kept  in  the  Akropolis,  in  order  that  they 
might  be  secure  against  any  falsifications  (Herodot.  v,  90). 
When  Heraclitus  had  finished  his  philosophical  work  on  nature, 
he  deposited  it  in  the  temple  of  Artemis  at  Ephesus  (Diog. 
Laert.  ix,  18).  The  Romans  also  preserved  their  sacred  books 
in  the  same  way;  and  the  writings  of  Zoroaster  were  kept  in 
a  vault  in  Persepolis.  Moses  also  entrusted  his  work  to  the 
custody  of  the  priests,  to  be  kept  in  the  sacred  Pavilion  on  the 


288  APPExXDIX   TO 

side  of  the  ark  (Deutr.  xxxi,  9,  26,  27);  so  Samuel  did  with 
the  royal  constitution,  which  he  wrote  (I  Samuel  x,  25);  and 
precisely  so  did  Joshua. 

"And  Joshua  wrote  these  words  in  the  book  of  the  law  of 
the  Lord  "  (xxiv,  26).  This  is  the  second  passage  of  peculiar 
importance  to  our  investigation ;  the  speeches  of  Joshua  were 
appended  to  the  law  of  Moses,  and  the  book  Jashar  was  kept 
with  the  law  of  Moses,  in  the  custody  of  the  priests,  as  well  as 
all  other  books  of  that  nature,  and  the  two  different  classes  of 
documents  were  the  basis  of  the  present  book  of  Joshua. 

A  third  passage  important  to  our  purpose  occurs  Joshua 
xviii,  1—10,  where  it  is  narrated  that  Joshua  had  assembled  the 
national  council  at  Shiloh,  where  the  tabernacle  stood,  from 
which  men  were  sent  to  describe  the  land  according  to  its  cities, 
who  brought  such  a  description,  according  to  which  the  land 
was  divided.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  geographical  or 
topographical  document,  together  with  a  description  of  the 
land  as  divided  among  the  tribes,  was  deposited  in  Shiloh,  as 
the  division  was  done  at  the  tabernacle  (xix,  51);  as  it  was 
customary  to  deposit  important  writings  at  the  national  sanc- 
tuary, as  we  have  seen  before,  Moses  already  having  observed 
this  custom  with  the  manna  (Genesis  xvi,  33),  and  with  the  rod 
of  Aaron  (Numbers  xvii,  25-26);  and  as  this  -  document  was  of 
a  vital  importance  to  prevent  trouble  about  boundaries,  which 
in  fact  never  occurred.  Thus  we  are  aware  of  all  the  original 
documents  from  which  our  author  composed  Joshua,  and  also 
of  the  placer~'where  they  were  kept. 

We  believe  that  these  facts  contribute  materially  to  the  his- 
torical importance  and  reliability  of  the  book,  as  the  materials 
were  not  exposed  to  interpolations,  and  the  book  could  be 
compared  with  the  original  documents,  which  undoubtedly  re- 
mained in  the  safe  keeping  of  the  priests.  Still,  on  the  other 
side,  we  are  cautioned  to  exercise  our  own  judgment  in  regard 
to  marvellous  events,  as  our  knowledge  of  them  is  derived 
from  poetical  compositions,  and  the  poet  has  the  privilege  to 
give  a  tint  of  his  own  to  events,  which  inspire  him  to  sing. 
A  comparison  of  the    144th  Psalm  on  the  dividing  of  the  Red 


PERIOD    II.  289 

sea,  with  the  prosaic  text  in  Exodus  (xiv,   15-31)  will  serve 
as  no  mean  evidence  to  this  effect. 

We  suppose  that  the  book  of  Joshua  must  have  been  written 
previously  to  the  book  of  Judges,  as  the  latter  book  contains 
extracts  and  passages  of  the  former.  There  may  be  objected 
to  this  that  the  book  Jashar  is  mentioned  again  in  Samuel,  as 
containing  a  song  of  David  on  the  death  of  Saul  and  Jonathan; 
but  we  believe  that  we  are  enabled  to  prove,  that  this  is  not 
an  important  objection;  that  the  collection  of  historical  epopees 
was  continued  in  after  ages,  although  extracts  had  been  made 
from  them  previously. 

In  order  to  reach  our  object,  we  must  review  the  last  chapter 
of  Deuteronomy.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  said  chap- 
ter was  not  written  by  Moses  or  Joshua;  because,  1.  It  says 
there,  "  God  showed  to  Moses  the  whole  of  Gilead  up  to 
Dan,"  which  can  mean  only  the  city  of  Dan  in  the  extreme 
north  of  Palestine;  but  this  city  was  first  called  Laish,  it  re- 
ceived the  name  Dan  in  a  later  period  (Judges  xviii,  29),  and 
remained  unknown  for  some  time  to  the  rest  of  the  Israelites 
(30);  the  author  of  Joshua,  however,  is  aware  of  that  city 
(Joshua  xix,  47).  2.  It  says  in  the  same  chapter,  "And  no 
man  knew  his  grave  up  to  this  day;"  which  is  in  itself  a  proof 
that  this  passage,  not  being  written  in  the  style  of  a  prophecy, 
was  written  long  after  the  death  of  Moses.  3.  A  great  praise 
is  bestowed  there  (verse  9)  upon  Joshua,  which  only  inter- 
rupts the  connection  of  the  sentences,  so  if  it  be  omitted  the 
connection  of  verses  8  and  10  is  much  more  proper,  but  which 
in  justice  to  the  unpretending  old  warrior  can  not  be  ascribed 
to  his  own  pen ;  it  would  be  too  much  of  a  contrast  to  the 
actions  of  Moses:  "  And  the  man  Moses  was  more  meek  than 
all  other  men;"  "  And  Moses  did  not  know  that  the  skin  of  his 
face  shone."  4.  It  says  there,  "  And  there  arose  not  yet  a 
prophet  in  Israel  like  Moses."  If  this  was  written  immediately 
after  the  death  of  Moses  or  shortly  after  it,  it  was,  indeed,  not 
much  of  a  praise,  as  there  was  no  prophet  in  Israel  before 
Moses,  and  the  writer  does  not  state  "  the  children  of  Israel." 
But  all  these  difficulties  are  overcome,  if  we  say,  the  author  of 
19 


290  APPENDIX   TO 

Joshua  found  appended  to  the  books  of  Moses  the  speeches  of 
Joshua  {Joshua  xxiv,  26)  which  he  thought  improper;  he 
therefore  commenced  his  work  with  the  last  chapter  of  Deu- 
teronomy, narrating  the  death  of  Moses  and  the  mourning  of 
Israel  on  his  behest.  He  then  continues,  in  the  way  of  excuse 
for  separating  the  speeches  of  Joshua  from  the  books  of  Moses, 
bestowing  a  proper  praise  on  Joshua,  which  he  concludes  with 
the  words,  "  And  they  did  (in  obeying  Joshua)  as  the  Lord  had 
commanded  Moses;"  Joshua's  wisdom  also,  he  says,  was  but  a 
consequence  of  Moses  having  laid  his  hand  upon  him ;  conse- 
quently Moses  was  altogether  superior  to  Joshua,  which  he  re- 
marks in  the  next  verse.  When  comparing  Joshua  to  Moses, 
he  says:  "  And  there  arose  not  yet  a  prophet  like  Moses,"  and 
therefore  he  thought  it  proper  to  separate  those  speeches  from 
the  Pentateuch,  and  to  insert  them  in  the  right  place  in  his 
work.  The  first  chapter  of  Joshua  is  so  naturally  a  continua- 
tion of  the  last  chapter  of  Deuteronomy,  in  style  and  contents, 
that  it  can  not  be  doubted  that  our  theory  is  correct. 

The  words  nirr  ID;*,  servant  of  the  Lord,  set  to  the 
name  of  Moses  in  Deuteronomy  (xxxiv,  5),  occur  no  less  than 
five  times  in  the  first  chapter  of  Joshua.  The  words  TWO  m^ra 
minister  of  Moses  are  added  to  the  name  of  Joshua,  when 
first  occurring;  these  words  are  contrasted  with  the  words 
"  servant  of  the  Lord,"  the  appellative  of  Moses,  to  give  again 
the  same  sense  as  verse  9  in  the  last  chapter  of  Deuterono- 
my. The  author  of  Joshua  could  do  so  in  his  book  and  in  the 
copy  of  the  law  wiiich  was  in  his  possession;  but  the  copy 
which  was  laid  up  in  the  tabernacle  remained  the  same  as 
before.  When  Samuel  wrote  down  the  royal  constitution,  he 
followed  the  plan  of  Joshua  and  appended  to  it  the  books  of 
Moses,  as  the  hai  included  in  the  beth  of  Bassefer  (I  Samuel  x, 
25)  plainly  shows,  according  to  the  custom  of  that  age,  to  call 
the  Pentateuch  the  book  par  excellence.  Had  the  author  of 
Joshua  found  any  other  appendix  besides  the  speeches  of  Joshua 
he  would  have  made  mention  of  it,  especially  as  it  would  have 
served  to  magnify  Moses's  dignity  and  greatness  as  a  prophet, 
if  compared  with  others  besides  Joshua;  it  is  therefore  certain, 


PERIOD    II.  291 

that  Joshua  was  written  before  the  age  of  Samuel.  The  book 
Jashar  which  we  find  in  Samuel  must  have  been  a  continuation 
of  the  more  ancient  one.  which  most  likely  also  contained  the 
songs  of  Moses. 

The  ancient  rabbins  ascribed  the  book  of  Joshua  to  the  pen 
of  Phineas.  the  son  of  Eleazer,  the  high  priest.  In  favor  of 
this  hypothesis  may  be  said:  1st,  The  style  of  the  whole  book 
is  so  much  Moses-like  that  it  may  be  ascribed  to  a  direct  pupil 
of  Moses,  which  Phineas  actually  was.  2d,  Whenever  men- 
tioning Phineas  (xxii,  13,  31,  32),  he  is  described  as  the  son 
of  Eleazer,  the  priest,  so  that  he  had  yet  no  name  of  any  im- 
port; nor  is  he  mentioned  at  the  end  of  the  book  as  the 
successor  of  his  father,  which  suggests  that  he  himself  was  the 
writer  of  it.  The  writer  must  have  known  more  about 
Phineas,  who  was  distinguished  even  in  the  latter  days  of 
Moses.  It  seems  that  the  writer  knew  nothing  of  the  idolatry 
of  coming  ages  (xxiv,  31).  The  objections  against  this  hypo- 
thesis are  but  slight,  and  if  one  considers  that  those  who 
settled  the  canon  may  have  added  certain  glossaries  to  a  better 
uuderstanding  of  the  text,  which  were  afterwards  confounded 
with  the  text,  the  objections  fall  totally  to  the  ground.  Still, 
there  is  no  positive  evidence  in  favor  of  Phineas  being  the 
author  of  the  work. 

Next  it  must  be  remarked,  that  according  to  its  style  it  be- 
longs to  the  first  period  of  Hebrew  literature,  which  reaches 
down  to  the  age  of  David.  It  is  extremely  difficult  to  assert 
that  a  writer  of  another  age  forced  himself  into  an  antiquated 
style ;  or  that  a  later  writer  should  have  been  able  to  write  so 
fluently  and  clearly,  in  an  age  when  that  style  had  become 
antiquated.  There  is  no  trace  in  Joshua  either  of  the  graceful 
beauty  of  the  second  period  of  Hebrew  literature,  or  of  the 
sublimity  and  power  of  the  prophetic  style,  or  of  the  artifi- 
cial, powerless  and  adulterated  style  of  the  last  period  of 
biblical  literature.  It  betrays  every  where  the  simplicity  and 
precision  of  the  Mosaic  style,  which  is  an  integral  evidence 
that  this  book,  together  with  the  books  of  Judges  and  Ruth, 
were  written  before  the  psalms  had  revolutionized  the  Hebrew 


292  APPENDIX    TO 

style.  Still,  it  is  impossible  to  say  who  wrote  it,  or  how  long 
before  the  Davidian  age  it  was  written.  This  much  is  sure, 
that  it  was  written  before  Judges,  because  the  last  words  of 
Joshua  are  quoted  in  Judges  (ii,  6-9).  An  extract  is  made  in 
Judges  ii,  1-5  from  the  speech  of  Joshua  (xxiii),  and  of  the 
story  of  Caleb  when  taking  Hebron.*  If  we  establish  the  age 
of  Judges,  we  shall  then  come  nearer  to  that  of  Joshua. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  last  five  chapters  of  Judges 
are  not  as  ancient  as  the  rest  of  the  book.  These  chapters 
were  written  in  the  time  of  David,  as  we  shall  see  immediately. 
Consequently  Judges  must  have  been  written  previous  to  that 
age.  This  brings  the  time  of  Joshua  to  at  least  the  age  of  Eli's 
administration.  There  are  the  following  reasons  for  believing 
that  the  last  five  chapters  of  Judges  were  written  in  the  time 
of  David: 

1.  It  is  the  intention  of  the  author  to  decry  the  republican 
form  of  government.  This  he  evinces  by  stating  four  times, 
"In  those  days  there  was  no  king  in  Israel,"  to  which  he 
twice  adds,  "  Every  man  did  what  he  deemed  right  in  his 
sight,"  which  is  an  apparent  endeavor  to  characterize  the  time 
of  the  republic  as  the  time  of  anarchy  and  confusion,  although 
he  contradicts  himself  by  the  power  and  strictness  which  the 
national  council  displayed  in  the  case  of  Benjamin  and  Jabesh 
in  Gilead. 

2.  The  second  design  of  the  author  is  to  throw  blame  on  the 
sons  of  Benjamin  and  the  inhabitants  of  Jabesh  in  Gilead;  he 
endeavors  to  depict  the  act  of  the  young  men  of  Gibeah  with 
the  horrible  colors  of  the  abhorred  sons  of  Sedom ;  he  accuses 
all  the  people  of  the  city,  while  Josephus  justly  remarks,  it 
was  the  act  of  but  a  few  young  men.  He  has  not  a  word  to 
say  why  the  people  of  Jabesh  did  not  send  their  representatives, 
and  why  the  people  of  Benjamin  refused  to  deliver  up  the 
malefactors.  He  evidently  represents  the  story  in  the  most 
detestable  light,  and  thus  discloses  his  intention. 

*  Judges  i,   10-15,  Joshua  xiv,  xv,  13-19. 


PERIOD    II.  293 

3.  He  bestows  a  compliment  on  Ephraim,  representing  the 
old  man  who  gave  shelter  to  the  Levite  to  be  an  Ephraimite, 
from  which  province  the  Levite  comes;  and  the  woman 
together  with  her  hospitable  and  highly  praised  lather,  whose 
hospitality  is  skillfully  compared  to  that  of  Abraham  and  Lot, 
are  of  Bethlehem  in  Jehuda,  on  whom  also  he  bestows  his  com- 
pliments. He  makes  no  mention  of  the  judge  then  governing, 
because  both  events  must  have  occurred  in  the  time  of  Othniel, 
son  of  Kenaz,  who  was  of  the  tribe  of  Jehudah,  and  he 
avoided  giving  offence  to  that  tribe.* 

4.  These  causes  concurred  in  the  time  of  David.  The  tribe 
of  Benjamin  and  Jabesh  in  Gilead  were  the  friends  of  Saul, 
and  they  never  were  satisfied  with  the  administration  of  David, 
as  we  shall  notice  in  the  next  period ;  they  produced  more  than 
one,  Shimi  son  of  Gera  and  Sheba  son  of  Bichri;  the  rigid 
measures  of  David  against  the  descendants  of  Saul,  and  the 
excavation  of  the  bodies  of  Saul  and  his  sons  after  the  Absa- 
lom revolution  speak  for  themselves,  The  Absalom  revolution, 
and  the  next  following  one  under  Sheba  were  republican  ones ; 
Absalom  only  desired  to  be  judge  of  Israel  (I  Samuel  xv,  4), 
which  appears  the  more  likely  since  he  had  no  son  to  inherit 
the  royal  dignity  (xviii,  18);  and  the  dissatisfied  people  under 
the  lead  of  Sheba  did  not  choose  another  king;  they  only 
deserted  the  house  of  David  (xx).  Ephraim  and  Jehudah  were 
the  two  most  powerful  and  loyal  tribes.  This  concurrence  of 
circumstances  proves  clearly  that  the  last  five  chapters  of 
Judges  were  written  in  the  days  of  David,  to  please  the  king 
and  to  defend  his  cause.  This  intention  is  also  visible 
throughout  the  book  of  Ruth,  although  less  directly  betraying 
the  design  of  the  writer.  The  author  of  the  main  part  of  the 
book  of  Judges  betrays  a  quite  different  intention.  His  aim 
is  to  convince  his  readers: 

1.  That  all  the  national  misfortunes  under  which  Israel 
suffered  have  but  one  and  the  same  cause,  the  abandonment  of 
the  religion  of  the  nation,  and  the  warship  yf  foreign  gods. 

*  Vide  Rashi,  Judges  xvii,  1 


294  APPENDIX    TO 

2.  That  the  salvation  from  misery  was  effected  by  judges, 
who  were  faithful  to  God,  and  who  succeeded  in  reforming  the 
people. 

He  dwells  with  a  special  delight  on  Deborah,  on  account  of 
her  brilliant  genius;  on  Gideon,  on  account  of  his  truly  repub- 
lican   spirit;    on   Jephthah  and  Samson,  on  account  of  their 
boldness  and  bravery.     He  only  denounces  the  corruptions  of 
the  people.     He  never  censures  the  judges,  or  any  other  branch 
of  the  government.     He  shows,   that  the  first  king  Abimelech 
was  supported  out  of  the  funds  of  Baal  by  a  rebellious  city, 
which  soon  felt  the  consequences  of  its  wickedness  in  enabling 
a  man  to  usurp  a  high  station  over  the   people  and  to  kill  his 
brothers.     The  writer  of  judges,  it  is  evident,  is  a  true-hearted 
republican    and  worshiper    of   Jehovah.     He    is  an  enemy  of 
foreign  worship,  and  entertains  the  hope  of  healing  his  people 
from   the    madness   of  paganism  by  showing  them,  that  this 
always  was  the  source  of  misery,  while  the  returning  to  God 
was  continually  the  source  of  salvation.     None  of  these  noble 
intentions  is  manifested  by  either  the  author  of  the  appended 
five  chapters  of  Judges,  or  by  the  author  of  Ruth.     The  latter 
authors  write    long  stories    containing   all   the  particulars  of 
single  events.     The   former  is    a  synoptician;    the  latter  are 
royalists,   and  give  us  no  insight  into  their   religious  views, 
while  the  former  is  a  republican,  and  openly  states  his  religious 
views.     Therefore  it  is  obvious  that  the  first  sixteen  chapters 
of  Judges  were  written  by  another  than  the  author  of  the  last 
five  and  the  book  of  Ruth.     It  appears,  that  this  book  which  is 
so  highly  republican,    was    so   largely  circulated    among    the 
people,  that  it  was  found  necessary  to  add  to  it  the  last  five 
chapters  as  a  counterbalance  to  the  former. 

There  are  the  following  reasons  to  believe  the  author  of  the 
first  sixteen  chapters  of  Judges  flourished  before  the  age  of 
David: 

1.  Had  the  author  possessed  the  least  knowledge  of  the 
existence  of  a  monarchical  government  in  Israel,  he  would  have 
opposed  it  directly  or  indirectly. 

2.  He  must  have  added  to  his  book  the  history  of  Eli  and  of 


PERIOD    II.  295 

Samuel,  especially  of  the  latter,  who  was  a  man  after  the  heart 
of  that  author.  The  history  of  Samuel  would  have  been  the 
crown  of  the  whole  work. 

3.  The  work  belongs,  according  to  its  style,  to  the  first  period 
of  Hebrew  literature. 

The  result  of  this  investigation  is, 

1.  The  book  of  Ruth  and  the  five  last  chapters  of  Judges 
were  written  in  the  time  of  David. 

2.  The  first  sixteen  chapters  of  Judges  must  have  been 
written  in  the  time  of  Eli.  If  they  were  written  after  the 
death  of  that  judge  his  history  would  be  in  the  book,  as  he 
was  such  a  man  as  the  author  desired  to  see. 

3.  The  book  of  Joshua  was  written  previously  to  the  ad- 
ministration of  Eli,  or  probably  by  Eli  himself. 

The  ancient  Israelites  had  a  tradition  that  Samuel  was  the 
author  of  the  book  of  Judges;  and  we  believe  it  is  very  easy 
to  recognize  him  as  the  author  of  the  first  sixteen  chapters  of 
Judges.  He  was  a  devout  republican  and  worshiper  of  Jeho- 
vah; he  was  no  friend  of  the  priests,  on  account  of  the  sons  of 
Eli,  and  of  the  story  of  Abimelech.  It  must  not  be  forgotten, 
that  Shechem  was  a  city  of  the  Levites  {Joshua  xxi,  21);  and 
he  made  no  mention  of  the  Levites  and  priests,  not  even  of  the 
change  of  the  high  priesthood  from  the  family  of  Eleazer  to 
that  of  Ithamar.  Samuel  was  the  strongest  opponent  of  pagan- 
ism; and  it  is  most  likely  that  he  wrote  the  book  for  the  very 
purpose  of  effecting  the  reforms  which  he  really  did  effect.  It 
appears  to  us,  that  the  book  of  Judges  was  of  the  same  import- 
ance to  Samuel  as  that  of  Genesis  was  to  Moses;  and  as  the 
Mosaic  mission  and  legislation  can  be  explained  only  by  the 
existence  of  the  book  of  Genesis,  so  the  mission  and  the  re- 
forms of  Samuel  can  be  accounted  for  only  by  the  existence  of 
this  book  among  the  people  at  large.  If  we  want  to  avoid 
violent  transitions  in  history,  which  are  unlikely  and  unphilo- 
sophical,  we  are  obliged  to  admit  that  Samuel  wrote  and 
promulgated  those  sixteen  chapters  to  prepare  his  age  for  the 
reforms  which  he  effected.  It  was  a  book  for  the  people,  and 
therefore  it  was  a  mere  synopsis.     Still  he  leaves  us  no  means 


296  APPENDIX    TO    PERIOD    II. 

of  deciding  whether  it  was  composed  out  of  original  documents, 
of  traditions,  or  was  only  abridged  from  a  larger  volume. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  that  records  were  kept  in  Shiloh  of  the 
history  of  the  different  judges,  and  these  seem  to  have  been 
the  sources  from  which  Samuel  copied,  and  to  which  he,  the 
favorite  of  Eli,  had  ample  access. 


PERIOD    III. 


FROM  THE  APPOINTMENT  OF  SAUL  TO  THE  ROYAL 
DIGNITY    TO    THE    DIVISION    OF    THE    KINGDOM 

(2680—2792,  a.  m.)  (1080—968,  b.  c). 

biblical  chronology. 

Administration  of  Saul, 32  years  (vide  appendix  to  Period  II). 

Administration  of  David  in  Hebron  over 

Jehudah, 7  years  (I  Kings  ii,  11). 

And  over  all  Israel, 33      l<      (I  Kings  ii,  11). 

Administration  of  Solomon, 40  years  (I       do  xi,  42). 

Total  number, 82 


CHAPTER  VII. 

FROM  THE  ACCESSION  OF  SAUL  TO  THE  THRONE  OF  ISRAEL 
TO  THE  DEATH  OF  HIS  SON  AND  SUCCESSOR  (1080—1041,  b.  c). 

Saul  had  been  appointed  to  the  royal  dignity  by  a  free  vote 
of  the  national  council,  and  with  the  consent  of  the  aged  and 
much  esteemed  prophet,  who  reluctantly  submitted  to  the  cur- 
rent of  popular  feeling,  which  he  could  not  control.  The 
anti-republican  author  of  I  Samuel  tells  us,  "  But  the  children 
of  Belial  (low  people)  said,  What  shall  this  man  help  us  ?  And 
they  despised  him  and  brought  him  no  presents.  But  he  held  his 
peace."  Still  we  shall  find  ample  opportunity  in  the  course  of 
this  period,  to  observe  that  the  republican  spirit  as  imparted 
by  the  Mosaic  institutions,  and  inhaled  during  four  centuries. 


298  PERIOD    III. 

was  deeply  rooted  in  the  Israelitish  people;  which  suggests  to 
us  the  supposition,  that  the  appointment  of  a  king  was  a  con- 
spiracy of  the  aristocracy  against  the  popular  will,  most  likely 
assisted  by  the  manouvres  of  the  Benjamite  politicians. 

Saul,  being  aware  of  the  state  of  the  popular  feeling,  had  not 
the  courage  to  take  the  reins  of  government  in  his  hands ;  he 
returned  to  his  fathers  estate  at  Gibeah,  and  continued  to 
attend  to  his  agricultural  affairs  for  one  year  (I  Samuel  xiii, 
1),  until  an  opportunity  offered  to  make  himself  popular  by 
personal  bravery  and  strategic  dexterity  ^  But  even  then  he 
had  not  the  courage  to  summon  the  warriors  to  active  service, 
however  important  the  case  was,  but  he  convoked  the  army  in 
his  and  Samuel's  name  (xi,  7).  This  plainly  proves  that  Sam- 
uel still  was  at  the  head  of  the  government,  as  president  of 
the  national  council,  and  Saul  was  only  charged  with  the  exe- 
cutive duties,  which  were  almost  limited  to  warlike  operations. 
The  opportunity  offered  to  Saul  was  this :  Nahash,  king  of 
Ammon,  whose  warlike  intention  had  been  anticipated  by  the 
government,  surprised  the  city  of  Jabesh  in  Gilead.  Finding 
the  city  in  a  state  of  defence,  he  threatened  to  take  it  by 
assault  before  an  army  could  be  brought  from  the  other  side  of 
the  Jordan.  The  people  offered  to  surrender  the  city  on  con- 
dition of  being  protected  against  violence.  But  the  king  of 
Ammon  made  this  outrageous  condition,  to  "  thrust  out  all 
their  right  eyes,  and  lay  it  for  a  reproach  upon  all  Israel." 
Nahash  undoubtedly  intended  to  spread  terror  over  the  invaded 
country,  in  order  to  more  easily  achieve  a  victory,  and  take 
vengeance  for  the  defeat  of  his  progenitor  by  Jephthah.  The 
elders  of  Jabesh  offered  no  resistance ;  they  only  demanded  a 
truce  of  seven  days,  which  was  granted  them.  Meanwhile, 
they  dispatched  messengers  to  inform  Saul  of  the  invasion. 
The  news  made  a  melancholy  impression  upon  the  inhabitants 
of  Gibeah,  who  had  assembled  to  sympathize  with  the  people 
of  Jabesh.  Saul  coming  "after  the  herd  out  of  the  field" 
was  informed  of  the  affair,  and  he  eagerly  embraced  the  oppor- 
tunity to  signalize  his  name.  He  summoned  the  warriors  of 
Israel  in  a  peculiar  manner:  "  And  he  took  a  yoke  of  oxen, 


CHAPTER     VII.  299 

and  hewed  them  in  pieces,  and  sent  them  throughout  all  the 
coasts  of  Israel,  by  the  hands  of  messengers,  saying,  Whoso- 
ever cometh  not  forth  after  Saul  and  after  Samuel,  so  shall  it 
be  done  unto  his  oxen.  And  the  fear  of  the  Lord  fell  on  the 
people,  and  they  came  out  with  one  consent."  Speedy  action 
was  necessary,  and  this  was  energetic  language.  The  people 
speedily  assembled  at  Bazek.  Saul  mustered  there,  as  our 
records  say,  three  hundred  thousand  men,  and  thirty  thousand 
of  Jehudah,  who  always  forming  the  advanced  guard  were 
therefore  counted  separately.  "  They  passed  over  Jordan,  and 
by  marching  all  that  night,  went  thirty  furlongs,  and  came  to 
Jabesh  before  sunrise.  •.  Saul  dividing  the  army  into  three  com- 
panies, fell  suddenly  and  unexpectedly  upon  the  enemy  on 
every  side,  and  joining  battle  with  them,  slew  a  great  number  of 
the  Ammonites,  as  also  their  king  Nahash  (Josephus)."  Saul 
appears  to  have  gone  too  far  in  his  zeal;  he  summoned  an 
army  to  rout  an  enemy  that  might  have  been  overcome  by  the 
sixth  part  of  it;  thus  needlessly  alarming  the  whole  country. 
Besides  this,  it  appears  that  Saul  had  not  shown  in  that  battle 
much  military  skill, which  he  could  not  do,  as  it  required  but  very 
little  tact  where  the  odds  were  greatly  in  his  favor.  Finally  it 
must  be  remarked,  that  the  principal  cause  by  which  the  people 
were  persuaded  to  favor  a  change  of  government — the  warlike 
intentions  of  the  king  of  Amnion — had  been  removed  in  a  single 
battle.  The  people,  therefore,  gave  bold  utterance  to  their 
sentiments,  saying  to  Samuel,  "Who  are  the  men  that  said 
Saul  shall  reign  over  us?  give  us  the  men,  that  we  may  put 
them  to  death."  Samuel  did  not  improve  the  opportunity  to 
depose  Saul  and  make  an  end  of  the  paradoxical  institution, 
because  Saul  was  elected  by  the  legally  constituted  govern- 
ment, and  Samuel  had  no  authority  to  act  at  his  own  accord. 
He  appeased  the  multitude,  and  persuaded  them  to  contirm  the 
dignity  of  Saul  on  the  classic  spot  of  the  first  Israelitish  camp, 
in  Canaan,  at  Gilgal.  The  people  willingly  followed  him  to 
that  place,  where  he  again  stated  in  his  address  to  the  people, 
that  there  was  no  cause  for  the  appointment  of  a  king  but  the 
idle  fear  of  the  king  of  Amnion;    that  he  had  been    disinte- 


300  PERIOD    III. 

restedly  devoted  to  the  interests  of  the  nation;  and  that  not- 
withstanding all  this,  a  king  was  demanded,  a  demand  which 
he  vainly  opposed.  But  it  was  now  his  and  their  duty  to 
support  the  king,  appointed  by  the  legal  government  of  the 
nation,  and  it  was  the  law  to  which  every  one  owed  uncon- 
ditional obedience,  for  the  law  was  the  expressed  will  of  God, 
and  they  after  all  might  be  happy  and  prosperous  if  they  and 
their  king  obeyed  the  law  of  the  Lord;  but  that  misery  and 
adversity,  unknown  before,  would  overtake  them  if  the  law 
was  set  at  defiance.  He  promised  them  that  he  would  never 
fail  to  teach  them  the  good  and  just  way.  At  the  beginning  of 
his  speech,  he  asked  the  people,  in  the  style  of  Moses  (Numbers 
xvi,  15),  to  tell  him  if  he  had  ever  betrayed  sentiments  of 
avarice  or  injustice,  or  if  he  had  ever  wronged  one  of  them, 
and  the  assembly  testified  to  the  uprightness  and  disinterested- 
ness of  his  administration. 

The  royal  dignity  of  Saul  was  confirmed  by  the  people  at 
Gilgal,  and  Saul  assumed  the  reins  of  government.  He  took 
the  first  step  toward  absolutism  by  forming  a  standing  army  of 
three  thousand  men,  two  thousand  of  which  he  commanded 
in  person,  and  stationed  them  at  Michmash  and  on  the  hill  of 
Beth  El;  and  one  thousand  of  them  were  stationed  at  Gibeah, 
under  the  command  of  his  son,  Jonathan.  This  measure  was 
completed  in  the  second  year  of  his  reign  (I  Samuel  xiii,  1); 
consequently,  Saul  was  not  as  young  when  appointed  to  the 
regal  office  as  is  generally  supposed.  Jonathan  attacked  and 
defeated,  apparently  without  orders,  a  Phelistine  garrison  at 
Geba,  which,  as  we  have  stated  before,  was  there  to  protect 
the  highway  of  the  Phelistines  through  Palestine,  which  was 
most  likely  granted  to  them  in  the  last  treaty  of  peace.  Whe- 
ther this  breach  of  the  peace  was  indeed  an  accidental  mis- 
demeanor of  Jonathan,  or  whether  it  was  a  secret  measure  of 
Saul,  to  give  to  the  Phelistines  a  pretext  for  war,  can  not  be 
well  ascertained.  Saul  summoned  his  army  to  Gilgal,  and  the 
Phelistines  came  up  to  Michmash.  According  to  our  source  of 
information,  the  Phelistines  numbered  thirty  thousand  horse, 
six  thousand  chariots,  and  a  numerous  army  of  footmen.     The 


CHAPTER     VII.  301 

national  council  seems  to  have  had  under  consideration  the  step 
taken  by  Saul,  which  was  considered  a  violation  of  existing 
treaties  with  the  Phelistines.  Saul,  of  course,  had  no  right  to 
begin  active  hostilities,  before  he  had  heard  from  the  national 
council  whether  the  treaties  should  be  renewed  or  war  be 
waged.  He  waited  but  seven  days  at  Gilgal,  until  his  army 
was  assembled  and  organized,  when  he  ordered  the  priest  to 
bring  the  usual  sacrifices,  preparing  the  army  to  meet  the 
enemy.  This  was  a  violation  of  his  rights,  an  usurpation  of 
power  which  threatened  the  nation  with  a  despotic  government. 
Samuel  arrived  at  Gilgal  before  the  army  marched,  and  he  saw 
in  this  second  act  of  Saul,  a  confirmation  that  the  attack  of 
Jonathan  upon  the  Phelistines  of  Geba,  was  a  secret  policy 
of  Saul.  Samuel,  therefore,  severely  admonished  Saul;  he 
charged  him  with  having  violated  the  constitutional  compact 
(I  Samuel  xiii,  13);  he  predicted  to  Saul  the  loss  of  his  dignity 
if  he  thus  continued  to  act  contrary  to  his  duty  (verse  14). 
Saul  attempted  to  excuse  himself  by  expressing  the  fear  that 
the  people  would  have  left  him  had  he  delayed  any  longer, 
and  the  excuse  at  least  was  a  proof  that  he  only  thought  of 
deceiving  the  national  council,  and  not  of  invading  the  consti- 
tutional compact;  but  the  prophet  left  him  dissatisfied  and 
returned  to  Gibeah  of  Benjamin,  where  also  Saul  had  fixed  his 
headquarters.  The  course  taken  in  this  matter  by  Samuel  is 
another  proof  that  he  was  still  at  the  head  of  the  national 
council;  and  his  stay  with  the  army  proves,  that  the  national 
council,  deceived  by  the  cunning  policy  of  Saul,  approved  of 
the  war. 

The  Phelistines  marched  in  three  divisions  upon  Palestine; 
one  division  marched  towards  Ophra  in  the  north  of  Benjamin, 
the  second  division  marched  on  Bethhoron  in  the  north  of  Dan, 
the  third  division  marched  into  the  south  of  Dan  and  Benjamin, 
towards  the  Valley  of  Zeboim;  between  these  divisions 
marched  the  principal  army,  which  formed  the  center  of  these 
operations,  and  which  succeeded  in  coming  as  far  as  Michmash, 
opposite  Geba  in  Benjamin,  where  Jonathan  stood  with  his 
advanced  guard  of  one  thousand  veteran  soldiers,  as  has  been 


302  •      •  PERIOD    III. 

remarked  before,  which  was  now  probably  strongly  reinforced. 
The  operations  of  the  Phelistines  were  in  a  straight  line  from 
west  to  east,  which  again  confirms  our  view  on  the  subject  that 
they  intended  but  to  have  a  free  passage  through  Palestine  to 
the  interior  of  Asia.  The  reason  why  they  succeeded  in  coming 
as  far  as  Michmash,  although  defeated  on  former  occasions 
upon  reaching  Mizpah,  seems  to  have  been,  that  the  people  in 
that  part  of  the  country  were  without  arms,  depending  on 
Phelistine  merchants  for  the  supply  of  iron,  and  probably  also 
for  the  supply  of  workmen. 

The  outposts  of  the  Phelistines  were  located  at  a  rock 
opposite  Geba,  separated  from  the  latter  place  by  a  narrow 
valley.  The  Phelistines  thought  themselves  secured  on  this 
side  against  any  attack,  because  the  rock  was  too  steep  to 
make  an  attack  probable.  Jonathan  made  proper  use  of  the 
means  afforded,  and  surprised  the  outposts  of  the  Phelistines, 
who  thought  it  impossible  for  the  Israelites  to  take  that 
height.  Twenty  men  of  the  outpost  were  killed;  the  rest  fled. 
But  at  the  same  time,  the  main  body  of  the  Phelistine  army 
was  alarmed,  and  rushed  to  the  attack.  Jonathan  stood  his 
ground  against  the  overwhelming  numbers,  probably  making 
use  of  the  intrenchments  which  the  Phelistines  had  made  to 
protect  their  outposts.  Meanwhile,  Saul,  being  quartered  at 
Gibeah,  had  been  informed  of  the  bold  and  successful  attack 
of  Jonathan,  and  of  the  perilous  state  in  which  he  now  was. 
He  marched  his  army  upon  the  enemy,  and  being  assisted  by 
the  Hebrews  who  were  forced  to  serve  in  the  Phelistine  army,  the 
enemy  was  routed  and  pursued  by  a  victorious  army  as  far  as 
to  Ajalon,  where  the  people,  being  weary,  rested  during  the 
night.  The 'same  night  Saul  was  told  not  to  pursue  the  Phe- 
listines into  the  interior  of  their  own  country,  as  was  his 
intention,  which  he  had  already  disclosed  to  his  officers.  The 
cause  was  obvious,  the  war  was  a  violation  of  existing  treaties, 
and  an  overstepping  of  the  royal  prerogative  as  limited  by  the 
law.  Saul,  who  desired  to  make  the  nation  believe  that  he  was 
innocent,  that  the  Phelistines  commenced  the  hostilities  in  con- 
sequence of  the  attack  of  Jonathan  upon  the  garrison  at  Geba, 


CHAPTER     VII.  305 

which  was  done  contrary  to  his  orders,  held  a  court  martial, 
tried  and  condemned  Jonathan  to  death,  on  account  of  his 
violation  of  orders;  but  the  warriors  assembled  around  the 
heroic  youth,  and  swore  that  not  a  hair  of  his  head  should 
fall  to  the  ground,  "And  the  people  redeemed  Jonathan,  and  he 
died  not."  This  seems  to  have  satisfied  the  defenders  of  the 
law,  and  confidence  in  the  government  of  Saul  was  restored 
(I  Samuel  xiv,  47).  The  Phelistines  repeatedly  sought  to 
effect  their  purpose,  but  in  vain;  they,  as  they  formerly  did, 
made  predatory  incursions  into  the  land,  but  they  did  not  meet 
with  much  success.  Still,  the  enmity  of  the  Phelistines  never 
abated  during  the  reign  of  Saul;  and  he  was  under  the  neces- 
sity of  having  a  standing  army  on  the  Phelistine  frontiers,  in 
order  to  protect  the  inhabitants  against  their  frequent  incur- 
sions. There  was  the  field,  where  afterwards  David  first 
signalized  his  name. 

Some  time  after  the  war  just  noticed  (there  is  no  chronology 
extant),  Samuel  came  to  Saul,  bringing  him  orders — undoubt- 
edly agreed  to  by  the  national  council — to  invade  the  land  of 
Amalek,  the  cognates  of  the  Anakims,  who  always  were 
among  the  enemies  of  Israel,  and  undoubtedly  also  were  the 
allies  of  the  Phelistines.  They  frequently  invaded  the  south- 
western part  of  the  land,  plundering  and  devastating  the 
country,  and  burning  the  villages  wherever  they  could  (I  Sam. 
xxxi,  2,  14).  It  was,  therefore,  determined  to  drive  them 
farther  into  the  desert,  and  deprive  them  of  the  means  to  dis- 
turb the  frontiers,  or  to  support  the  enemies  of  Israel.  Samuel 
plainly  stated  to  Saul,  that  it  was  the  will  of  God — revealed 
through  the  national  council — that  the  nation  of  Israel  do  not 
follow  the  example  of  their  neighbors,  to  invade  countries  for 
the  purpose  of  taking  spoils.  The  end  and  aim  of  the  con- 
templated invasion  being  to  chastise  an  old  and  irreconcilable 
enemy,  who  never  ceased  to  molest  the  inhabitants  of  the 
frontiers,  wherefore  no  spoil  should  be  brought  home.  Whoever 
refused  to  seek  refuge  in  the  interior  of  the  desert,  should  be 
killed   by  the  advancing  army.     Saul  summoned  the  army  to 


394  PERIOD    III. 

Telem  in  Jehudah.*  Two  hundred  thousand  men  and  ten 
thousand  of  Jehudah,  the  advanced  guard,  assembled  at  the 
stated  place.  Saul  marched  on  the  city  of  Amalek,  and  after 
he  had  summoned  the  descendants  of  Jeth.ro  to  leave  Amalek, 
which  they  did,  the  attack  was  commenced,  and  the  Amalekites 
were  defeated  on  all  points,  as  far  as  to  the  wilderness  of  Shur, 
on  the  frontiers  of  Egypt.  Agag,  the  king  of  Amalek,  fell 
into  the  hands  of  Saul,  and  a  large  spoil  of  cattle  was  made; 
but,  excepting  Agag,  all  of  the  Amalekites  who  did  not  flee  were 
slain.  Saul  returned  crowned  with  victory.and  haughty  on  account 
of  his  success  against  three  of  the  most  troublesome  enemies  of 
his  country.  He  not  only  had  disobeyed  the  express  will  of  the 
national  council,  but  he  publicly  demonstrated  his  haughtiness 
by  setting  himself  a  monument  on  Mount  Carmel  in  Jehudah 
(I  Samuel  xv,  12),  after  which  he  marched  to  Gilgal.  In  that 
place  he  was  met  by  Samuel,  the  faithful  guardian  of  the  law, 
which  was  the  only  security  for  the  prosperity  and  liberties  of 
the  nation.  Samuel  suspected  the  conduct  of  Saul  in  the  affair 
of  the  Phelistines,  and  the  treatment  of  Jonathan  could  not 
satisfy  the  old  and  experienced  statesman.  He  perceived  now 
with  alarm  the  disobedience  and  haughtiness  of  the  king,  which 
made  him  tremble  for  the  liberties  of  the  nation.  He  perceived 
that  the  course  of  Saul  must  inevitably  lead  to  the  overthrow 
of  the  law,  and  the  establishment  of  a  despotic  monarchy,  and 
he  endeavored  with  that  boldness  and  power  of  speech  peculiar 
to  the  prophets  of  Israel,  to  arrest  his  designs.  Samuel  was 
confirmed  in  his  suspicion,  when  he  saw  Agag  as  the  captive 
of  Saul.  What  other  design  could  Saul  have  in  the  act  of 
sparing  just  that  one  man,  than  to  satisfy  his  pride  in  having, 
according  to  the  custom  of  that  age,  a  king  among  his  servants; 
or  probably  to  use  him  to  secure  the  cooperation  of  the  Ama- 
lekites if  their  service  should  be  needed  by  the  king  to  subjugate 
Israel  to  his  will?  Samuel  in  a  private  conversation — undoubt- 
edly noted  down  in  his  private  journal — unmasked  Saul,  who 
stood  before  him   as    a    criminal  before   his  judge.      Samuel 

*  Compare  I  Samuel  xv,  4,  with  Joshua  xv,  24. 


CHAPTER    VII.  305 

admonished  him  not  to  imagine  that  he  would  succeed  in 
establishing  a  despotic  government,  that  the  attempts  made 
already  had  estranged  from  him  the  hearts  of  the  leaders  of 
the  nation,  and  that  a  new  attempt  of  this  kind  would  cost 
him  his  office,  and  probably  his  life.  Saul  confessed  his  guilt, 
promised  to  abide  by  the  law,  and  entreated  Samuel  not  to 
betray  him  to  the  people.  Samuel  obeyed.  Agag  was  executed, 
and  Samuel  went  in  company  with  Saul  to  the  public  worship, 
thanking  God  for  the  victory;  but  Samuel  returned  to  his  own 
house  in  Ramah,  and  retired  from  public  business. 

Saul,  according  to  a  statement  in  I  Samuel,  xxviii,  that  he 
had  endeavored  to  expel  from  the  land  all  persons  practicing 
arts  of  imposture  prohibited  by  the  law  of  Moses,  must  have 
faithfully  administered  the  laws,  which  is  especially  evident 
from  his  having  the  high  priest  with  him  in  the  camp,  whose 
voice  he  religiously  obeyed,  and  from  the  fact  that  no  idolatry 
existed  in  his  reign.  The  attachment  to  him  and  to  his  house, 
which  was  manifested  after  his  death,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter, 
is  no  mean  evidence  in  favor  of  his  administration.  The  ad- 
monishing voice  of  Samuel  seems  to  have  had  a  good  effect 
upon  Saul,  and  he  might  have  been  the  happy  monarch  of  a 
happy  people,  if  it  had  not  been  decreed  otherwise  by  Provi- 
dence. The  fame  of  the  youthful  and  heroic  bard  of  Israel, 
David,  made  him  jealous,  ill-humored,  despotic,  cruel,  and 
finally  also  superstitious,  and  threw  him  into  the  yawning 
abyss  of  despair,  where  he  ended  in  suicide.  The  internal 
connection  of  the  occurrences  by  which  this  state  of  mind  was 
produced,  is  so  natural  and  truthful,  that  notwithstanding  the 
apparent  contradictions  in  the  records,  it  is  easy  to  find  the 
connecting  thread  of  affairs. 

Jesse  of  Bethlehem,  a  descendant  of  one  of  the  aristocratic 
families  of  Jehudah  had  eight  sons,  three  of  whom  served  in 
the  standing  army  of  Saul  on  the  Phelistine  frontiers.  The 
eighth  and  youngest,  David,  tended  the  flocks  of  his  father,  and 
followed  the  inclination  of  his  mind  to  music  and  poetry.  He 
was  a  beautiful  lad,  "good  looking  and  with  bright  eyes," 
was  so  blessed  with  bodily  strength,  that  he  could  boast  of 
20 


306  PERIOD     III. 

having  killed  a  lion  and  a  bear.     He  had  no  practice  in  hand- 
ling   arms,   but   he    understood    the    better   how   to   manage 
skillfully  the  slings.     He  sometimes  came  to  see  his  brothers 
in  the  army,   to  bring  them  provisions,  in  places  where  they 
happened  to  be  stationed.     During  the  many  incursions  of  the 
Phelistines,  one  band  of  theirs   signalized  themselves  by  the 
valor  and  personal  strength  and  courage  of  their  leader  Goliath, 
who  was  descended  by  his  mother  from  the  race  of  Anakims. 
As  that  particular  band  was  very  troublesome  to  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  frontiers,  Saul   concluded  upon   preventing  their 
incursions,  and  he  concentrated  a  considerable  force  on  the 
frontier  near  Socoh  in  Jehudah,  where  the  Phelistines  led  by 
Goliath  were   found  encamped  on  a  hill.     Goliath,  who  saw 
himself  outnumbered,  to  avoid  a  general  battle,  proposed  that 
a  single  combat  should  decide  which  party  should  leave  the 
field  to  the  other.     It  would  have  been  regarded  dishonorable 
and  cowardly  to  reject  such  a  proposal;  still  no  one  had  the 
courage  to  fight  a  man  of  such  a  gigantic  appearance,  armed  as 
he  was  with  a  helmet  of  brass,  a  coat  of  mail,  and  greaves  of 
brass  upon  his  legs.     The  Phelistine,  perceiving  that  none  dare 
meet  him  in  single  combat,  became  insolent,  and  insulted  not 
only  the  Israelitish  nation,  but  also  their  God.    David  happened 
to  come  to  the  camp  with  provisions  for  his  brothers  and  a 
present  for  the  commander  of  the  division;  he  heard  the   inso- 
lent language  of  the  Phelistine ;  his  noble  mind  revolted  against 
such  an  insult;  he,  notwithstanding  the  earnest  remonstrance 
of  his  brothers  and  the  advice  of  the  king  and  his   officers, 
stepped  forward  to  fight  the  man  so  decidely  his  superior  in 
bodily  strength,  in  military  skill  and  experience,  and  in  military 
weapons.      Goliath   cursed   when    he    saw  the   unarmed   and 
beardless  youth ;  but  David  threatened  to  throw  his  flesh  before 
the  birds  of  prey,  and  the  ferocious  beasts.     He  fully  kept  his 
promise;  for  he  was  master  in  the  art  of  slinging  stones,  and 
before  the  boasting    Phelistine  could  gain   time  to   strike  at 
David,  a  sharp  stone  was  lodged  in  his  forehead,  which  instantly 
threw  him  senseless  to  the  ground.     David  improved  the  mo- 
ment; he  took  his  opponent's  sword,  separated  the   head  from 


CHAPTER   VII.  307 

the  prostrate  body,  and  bearing  both  head  and  sword  he  re- 
turned triumphantly  to  the  camp,  where  lie  was  greeted  by  a 
shouting  multitude.  The  Phelistines  fled,  and  were  pursued  to 
the  very  gates  of  Gath  and  Ekron,  covering  the  roads  with 
their  dead  bodies.  David  was  introduced  to  the  king  by  Abner, 
the  chief  general  of  Saul.  Saul  asked  the  heroic  youth  whose 
son  he  was:  "  And  David  said,  I  am  the  son  of  thy  servant 
Jesse  the  Bethlohemian." 

A  thorough  examination  of  I  Samuel  xvi  and  xvii,  reveals  to 
the  reader  singular  facts  which  are  embarrassing  to  the  histo- 
rian. While  we  are  told  in  the  sixteenth  chapter,  that  the 
prophet  Samuel  anointed  the  juvenile  David  to  be  king  of 
Israel,  which  was  done  in  the  presence  of  his  father,  and  as  it 
appears  also  in  presence  of  his  seven  brothers,  we  are  told  in 
the  seventeenth  chapter,  that  Eliab,  the  brother  of  David,  gave 
a  thorough  scolding  to  the  lad  because  he  left  his  flocks  in  the 
desert    and   came    down  to  see  the  war.     In  the    eighteenth 

t  a 

chapter  (verse  18)  David  himself,  when  he  was  offered  the 
hand  of  the  royal  princess,  said,  "  Who  am  I,  and  what  is  the 
life  of  my  father's  family  in  Israel,  that  I  should  become  son- 
in-law  to  the  king?"  The  fact  of  David  having  been  anointed 
by  Samuel  is  mentioned  no  more,  neither  in  history  nor  in  his 
Psalms;  when  he  comes  to  Hebron,  to  become  king  of  Jehudah, 
he  is  anointed  by  the  men  of  Jehudah  (II  Samuel,  ii,  4);  and 
when  appointed  king  of  all  Israel  he  is  again  anointed  by  all 
Israel  (ibid  v.  3),  without  any  reference  to  the  act  of  Samuel. 
David  himself  calls  Saul  "  The  Messiah  of  the  Lord,"  and 
Saul  was  anointed  by  Samuel  only;  if  David  was  anointed 
by  Samuel,  then  Saul  was  no  longer  the  Messiah  of  the  Lord. 
Next  we  are  told,  in  the  sixteenth  chapter  (verse  18),  that 
one  of  Saul's  servants  said  concerning  David:  "  Behold  I  have 
seen  a  son  of  Jesse  of  Bethlehem  who  is  a  musician,  a  noble 
hero,  a  warlike  man,  an  intelligent  judge,  a  man  of  figure, 
and  God  is  with  him,"  still  in  the  seventeenth  chapter  We  are 
told,  that  Saul  said  to  David  "Thou  canst  not  go  to  that 
Phelistine  to  fight  him,  for  thou  art  a  lad,  and  he  is  a  man  of 
war  from   his  youth."     The  implements    of   war  are   new  to 


308  PERIOD   III. 

David  and  he  can  not  wear  them ;  wherefore  he  throws  them 
away  (verse  39),  and  proceeds  towards  Goliath  with  a  few 
stones,  without  any  arms. 

[n  the  sixteenth  chapter  we  are  told  that  Saul  sent  for  David, 
who  came  to  Saul,  played  before  him,  and,  with  the  especial 
permission  of  Jesse,  David  remained  with  Saul,  who  so  loved 
him  that  he  made  him  his  arm-bearer.  But  in  chapter  seven- 
teen we  are  informed,  that  Saul  on  seeing  David  proceed  to- 
wards Goliath,  asked  Abner,  "  Whose  son  is  that  lad?"  On 
which  Abner  answered:  "  As  thou  livest,  0  king,  I  do  not 
know  him."  David  is  again  interrogated,  and  answers  the 
king,  "lam  the  son  of  thy  servant  Jesse  of  Bethlehem;"  after 
which  he  was  taken  to  the  royal  court,  and  Saul  suffered  him 
not  to  return  any  more  to  the  house  of  his  father"  (II.  Sam- 
uel xviii,  2).  The  attempts  to  reconcile  those  two  chapters 
have  hitherto  proved  a  perfect  failure.  As  far  as  our  critical 
judgment  reaches,  we  believe  that  there  is  a  mistake,  which 
can  easily  be  corrected,  if  a  proper  privilege  is  granted  to  bibli- 
cal criticism.  The  campaign  of  the  Phelistines  is  a  fact  which 
can  not  be  denied;  for  to  invent  a  whole  campaign  in  as  early 
an  age  as  the  book  of  Samuel  must  have  been  written  in,  is  a 
matter  of  impossibility,  especially  with  the  author  of  Samuel, 
who  betrays  every  where  an  exactness  and  love  of  truth  which 
admits  of  no  such  accusation;  he,  the  patron  of  David,  records 
all  the  gross  sins  of  David  as  fully  as  his  virtues.  That  David 
actually  smote  the  Phelistine  whose  name  was  Goliath  is  men- 
tioned in  two  other  passages  (I.  Samuel  xxii,  10);  consequently 
this  part  of  the  narrative  can  be  no  interpolation  as  some 
critics  supposed.  That  David  played  before  Saul  is  no  less 
warranted  by  other  passages,  nay  it  is  even  stated  that  he 
played  before  Saul  every  day  (ibid  xviii,  11).  In  the  same 
place  it  is  also  stated  that  Saul  commissioned  him  with  the 

command  over  a  thousand,    which   could  not  have  been  done 

•  ..... 

if  he  had  not    some  military  distinction  previous  to  that  time. 

The  two   principal  facts  can  not  be   denied  on  any  rational 

ground,  and  we  believe  that  the  fault  lies  in  the  arrangement, 

a  transposition  of  the  matter  on  the  old  principle  DipiD  pa 


CHAPTER  VII.  309 

mira  iroHD*  that  the  narratives  are  not  arranged  in  a  chronolo- 
gical order  in  the  Bible,  will  set  the  whole  in  order.  Let  ns 
set  after  the  xv  chapter,  the  xvii  chapter,  as  it  is,  without  any 
alteration,  the  campaign  of  the  P  he  lis  tines,  the  boasting  of 
Goliath,  the  accidental  arrival  of  the  shepherd  lad  David,  his 
indignation  on  hearing  the  insulting  language  of  Goliath,  his 
determination  to  fight  the  giant-like  man,  the  consequent  fight, 
the  death  of  Goliath,  the  surprise  and  the  inquiry  of  Saul,  and 
also  the  consequent  friendship  of  Jonathan  (xviii,  1).  However 
fabulous  this  may  sound,  there  is  so  little  unusual  in  the  whole, 
that  we  can  not  comprehend  how  any  thing  but  the  daring 
conduct  of  David  can  be  admired  in  the  whole  piece;  but 
David  himself  stated  that  he  was  so  expert  in  the  art  of  throw- 
ing sharp  stones  that  he  prostrated  to  the  ground  a  lion  and  a 
bear  in  the  same  way,  so  that  he  could  easily  kill  them;  pre- 
cisely as  he  did  to  the  Phelistine.  We  find  frequent  mention 
of  such  slingers,  who  were  very  expert  in  the  art  (Judges 
xx,  16).  What  could  the  king  do  with  the  young  shepherd  who 
chanced  to  kill  a  man  in  a  single  combat?  He  could  admire 
the  courage  and  dexterity  of  the  lad,  and  that  was  all.  He 
may  have  bestowed  upon  him  a  due  praise,  laid  up  the  sword 
of  Goliath  in  the  tabernacle,  may  have  sent  the  head  of  Goliath 
to  Jerusalem,  to  deter  the  rebellious  Jebusite  who  held  with 
the  Phelistines,  and  David  returned  to  his  father.  David,  thus 
encouraged  by  his  friends  and  by  the  king  himself,  and  most 
likely  still  more  praised  by  the  people,  attracted  the  attention 
of  Samuel,  who  came  to  Bethlehem  on  a  sacred  mission,  and 
bestowed  also  due  praise  upon  the  juvenile  David.  It  was  ru- 
mored that  Samuel  anointed  David  to  be  king  of  Israel;  Saul 
heard  it,  he  knew  that  he  was  disliked  by  Samuel,  that  much 
was  spoken  of  the  youthful  warrior,  who  most  likely  practiced 
now  more  than  before  the  art  of  handling  arms,  and  the  evil 
spirit  came  upon  Saul.  A  player  was  proposed  to  the  king  to 
amuse  him;  David  was  a  good  player,  Jonathan  loved  him,  and 
caused  that  he  be  proposed  to  the  king,  who  gladly  embraced 
the  opportunity  to  have  his  supposed  rival  under  his  direct 
control.      Messengers   were   sent   to   Jesse,    and   David   was 


310 


PERIOD    III. 


brought  to  Saul,  whose  jealousy  vanished  on  seeing  the  young, 
simple  and  unpretending  shepherd,  who  indicated  no  such  a 
desire  as  to  be  king  or  even  son-in-law  of  the  king.  The  amia- 
ble qualities  of  David  overcame  the  prejudices  of  the  monarch, 
and  young  David  became  the  favorite  and  arm -bearer  of  Saul. 
But  David  was  treated  by  the  courtiers  with  marked  respect 
on  account  of  being  the  favorite  of  the  king  (xviii,  4).  David 
also  secured  to  himself  the  favor  of  the  soldiers,  and  Saul's 
jealousy  was  again  awakened.  He  attempted  to  kill  him,  but 
failed  to  do  so  (ibid,  ii),  and  superstition  was  added  to  jealousy. 
Saul  wished  to  dismiss  David,  but  he  could  not  well  do  it, 
being  the  favorite  of  the  court,  and  he  gave  him  the  command 
over  a  thousand  (verse  13).  But  David  was  successful  as  a 
warrior,  and  the  women  s.ung,  "  Saul  slew  thousands  and 
David  slew  myriads  (verse  7),  and  the  jealousy  of  Saul  found 
new  nutriment,  so  that  he  suspected  David  ever  after  (verse  9). 
This  sets  the  whole  matter  right.  Opposed  to  it  is  xviii,  2. 
"  And  Saul  took  him  at  that  day  and  suffered  him  no  more  to 
return  to  his  father;"  but  Ninn  UV2  (that  day)  is  a  vague  term, 
it  does  not  refer  to  the  day  when  the  Phelistine  was  smitten, 
it  can  mean  as  well  any  day  after  it.  The  last  part  of  the 
verse  speaks  in  our  favor:  he  suffered  him  no  more  to  return 
to  his  father,  consequently  he  must  have  done  so  before,  which 
is  mentioned  positively,  xvii,  14.  The  three  eldest  brothers 
were  continually  with  Saul  in  the  army.  David  went  to  and 
returned  from  Saul  to  feed  his  father's  flocks  at  Bethlehem.  He 
went  to  Saul,  killed  Goliath  and  then  he  returned.  Chapter 
xv  ends  with  the  displeasure  of  Samuel  with  Saul;  con- 
sequently the  compiler  begins  the  next  with  following  up  the 
consequences  of  that  displeasure  without  regard  to  the  chro- 
nological order,  then  filling  up  the  vacuity  in  chapter  xvii, 
in  consequence  of  which  the  beginning  of  chapter  xviii  is 
disarranged. 

David  was  well  received  at  court.  Jonathan  lo^ed  the 
youthful  bard  and  warrior,  and  distinguished  him  by  present- 
ing him  a  set  of  arms  and  a  cloak.  The  prejudices  of  Saul 
also  were  overcome  by  the  personal   qualities,   by  the  simple 


CHAPTER  VII.  311 

and  unpretending  behavior  of  David,  and  the  king  conferred 
the  dignity  of  arm- bearer  upon  the  young  Bethlehemian.  Da- 
vid was  also  sent  for  some  time  to  the  army  that  guarded  the 
frontiers,  either  as  an  especial  messenger  of  the  king,  or  merely 
to  satisfy  his  ambition.  Whenever  he  joined  the  army  he 
returned  crowned  with  military  glory,  and  he  rose  so  continu- 
ally in  the  estimation  of  the  warriors,  that  Saul  gave  him 
command  over  a  body  of  soldiers,  which  pleased  both  the  people 
and  the  royal  officers. 

The  distinctions  conferred  upon  David  by  the  king  and  the 
royal  prince  made  him  the  favorite  of  the  courtiers,  as  his 
personal  bravery  obtained  for  him  the  favor  of  the  people. 
This  was  demonstrated  by  the  women",  who  once  met  David 
when  returning  from  an  expedition,  and  received  him  with 
song  and  music.  They  praised  the  young  hero  in  words  which 
were  dangerous,  "  Saul  smote  his  thousands  and  David  smote 
his  myriads."  The  jealousy  of  the  king  was  roused.  This  de- 
monstration convinced  him  that  David  was  dangerous  to  his 
house,  and  he  sought  means  to  make  it  otherwise.  While  in  a 
fit  of  passion,  Saul  endeavored  to  assassinate  David,  but  failing 
in  his  attempt,  superstition  was  added  to  jealousy  and  made 
the  king  the  more  unhappy.  When  the  burst  of  passion  was 
over,  Saul  repented  of  his  conduct,  and  in  order  to  appease 
David  made  him  "  a  prince  of  a  thousand,"  which  signifies 
that  he  was  made  military  commander  over  the  warriors  of  one 
tribe.  From  the  statement  of  our  annalist  "  And  all  Israel 
and  Jehudah  loved  David,"  we  learn  that  he  was  charged  with 
the  command  over  the  warriors  of  his  own  tribe. 

David  was  now  enabled  to  act  a  conspicuous  part  in  the  country, 
and  he  made  the  best  use  of  this  advantage.  He  daily  grew  in 
popularity,  and  became  always  more  important  to  the  crown. 
Saul  devised  means  to  secure  the  friendship  of  David  to  his 
house.  An  opportunity  soon  offered,  which  was  eagerly  em- 
braced. Michal,  the  youngest  daughter  of  Saul,  fell  in  love 
with  David.  Saul  informed  the  young  hero,  that  he  must  gain 
the  favor,  and  merit  the  hand  of  the  princess  by  another  valor- 
ous   action.      David    undertook    an    expedition    against    the 


312  PERIOD      III. 

Phelistines,  and  laying  before  the  king  a  proof  that  he  had 
killed  two  hundred  of  the  enemy,  he  received  the  beautiful 
reward  from  the  king. 

David,  being  now  the  king's  son-in-law,  became  more  danger- 
ous to  the  royal  house  than  ever  before.  For  his  sphere  of 
action  was  enlarged;  the  respect  of  the  courtiers  and  his  popu- 
larity daily  increased,  which  was  calculated  to  highten  the 
indomitable  jealousy  of  the  king.  Saul  thought  it  necessary 
to  have  David  killed  secretly,  and  communicated  his  plan  to 
Jonathan,  who  pleaded  for  his  friend,  and  Saul  changed  his 
mind  again.  But  every  new  act  of  valor  which  David  per- 
formed, inflicted  a  deep  wound  in  the  heart  of  the  hapless 
king.  When  David  had  again  defeated  a  division  of  Phelis- 
tines, the  king  attempted  again,  in  a  fit  of  passion,  to  assassi- 
nate his  son-in-law,  but  he  failed  again  to  accomplish  his  design. 
David  instantly  left  the  royal  palace  and  returned  to  his  house. 
But  Saul  was  aware  of  the  danger  which  threatened  his  house 
if  David  was  forced  to  act  as  an  avowed  enemy  of  the  king; 
he  therefore  dispatched  messengers  to  watch  the  house  of  David 
all  night,  and  bring  him  in  the  morning  to  the  king  (Psalm 
lix).  If  Saul  had  intended  to  kill  David  he  might  have  effected 
his  purpose  without  watching  the  house  all  night.  It  therefore 
appears  to  us  that  the  intention  of  Saul  was  to  adopt  a  pacify- 
ing course  towards  David.  But  the  gossips,  such  as  abound 
in  every  royal  court,  informed  the  terrified  Michal  of  the 
intention  of  her  father  to  kill  David. 

Michal  helped  David  out  of  the  house  without  attracting  the 
notice  of  the  royal  guard,  and  he  fled  to  the  aged  Samuel,  who 
still  presided  over  his  school  in  Raman.  The  king  soon 
learned  where  David  was,  and  the  apathy  of  Samuel  against 
Saul  being  too  well  known  to  the  latter,  his  imagination  at 
once  pictured  David  entering  into  a  league  with  the  enemies 
of  his  house,  therefore  no  time  was  lost,  messengers  were 
dispatched  to  Ramah  to  bring  David  to  the  king.  But  none  of 
the  messengers  of  Saul  had  the  courage  to  invade  the  temple 
of  art  and  science,  in  which  the  aged  and  venerable  prophet 
ministered;  they  returned  without  having  fulfilled  their  mission. 


CHAPTER  VII.  313 

Saul  himself  then  ,went  to  Raman,  but  Samuel  still  exercised 
so  much  influence  over  him,  that  he  committed  no  act  of 
violence  on  the  person  of  David.  Saul  departed,  apparently  so 
much  satisfied  that  the  people  exclaimed,  "  Is  also  Saul  among 
the  prophets?"  considering  him  appeased  with  that  powerful 
class  of  people,  the  national  literati. 

David  had  no  confidence  in  the  state  of  affairs.  He  left 
Samuel  to  take  up  his  abode  in  some  secure  retreat,  but  de- 
siring to  see  once  more  his  friend  Jonathan,  he,  in  order  to 
satisfy  his  longing  heart,  ventured  to  approach  the  region, 
where  Saul  resided.  Jonathan  on  being  informed  of  the  pre- 
sence of  David,  went  into  the  field  to  see  him.  The  interview 
of  the  friends  is  depicted  in  our  sources  in  the  most  touching 
manner.  Jonathan  did  not  believe  it  to  be  the  intention  of  his 
father  to  kill  David.  After  he  had  ascertained,,  at  the  risk 
of  his  own  life,  the  intentions  of  his  father  concerning  David, 
he  informed  the  latter  of  the  imminent  danger  threatening  him. 
They  embraced  each  other  again,  and  sealing  the  covenant  of 
friendship  by  a  sacred  oath  and  the  tears  of  love,  they  parted. 
David  came  to  Nob  unarmed  and  without  provisions.  He 
persuaded  Ahimelech,  the  high  priest,  to  give  him  the  sword  of 
Goliath  and  of  the  sacred  bread.  The  enmity  of  Saul  toward 
David  was  still  so  much  a  secret,  that  not  only  was  Ahimelech 
ignorant  of  it,  but  so  also  was  Doag,  the  king's  officer,  who 
was  present,  which  confirms  our  view  of  the  subject. 

David,  proceeding  to  the  South  to  seek  refuge  in  the  mount- 
ains of  Jehudah,  fell  in  with  a  party  of  Phelistines,  who 
brought  him  captive  to  Achish,  king  of  Gath.*  The  Phelis- 
tines were  not  sure  that  their  captive  was  the  heroic  David; 
he  therefore  affected  insanity,  which  gave  Achish,  the  friend 
of  David,  an  opportunity  to  dismiss  him  in  peace.  The  friend- 
ship of  Achish  most  likely  should  be  ascribed  to  the  fact  that 
he  saw  in  David  an  opponent  of  Saul. 

David  went  to  Adullam,  a  town  in  Jehudah,  in  the  vicinity 
of  the  Dead  sea;  he  occupied  a  cave  near  that  city,  bearing 
the  same  name,    which  was   of  difficult  access  (Psalm  lvii). 

*  Compare  I  Sam.  xxxi,  11-16,  with  Pasluis  xxxiv.  lvi. 


314  PERIOD    III. 

Saul's  persecutions  fell  heavily  upon  all  the  friends  of  David, 
so  that  even  his  aged  parents  were  obliged  to  seek  refuge  with 
their  persecuted  son.  They  came  to  David,  at  Adullam,  in 
company  with  about  four  hundred  more  of  his  persecuted 
friends.  David  at  once  organized  his  friends,  and  was  pre- 
pared to  offer  effectual  resistance  to  the  king's  forces.  He 
brought  his  old  parents  to  the  king  of  Moab,  who  entertained 
them  hospitably  for  a  long  time,  and  David  selected  for  himself 
and  his  men  a  fortified  place,  Mezudah,  which  according  to 
tradition  was  on  the  Moabite  frontiers,  probably  at*the  south- 
ern extremity  of  the  Dead  sea. 

Saul  saw  the  approach  of  that  which  he  feared  most.  David 
openly  opposed  to  his  authority,  holding  a  castle  and  at  the 
head  of  a  standing  army.  One  day  he  accused  his  best  friends 
of  being  in  a  secret  connection  with  David,  as  was  his  son 
Jonathan.  Doag,  the  Idumean,  was  the  only  man  who  an- 
swered; he  stated  that  he  had  witnessed  the  hospitality  of  the 
high  priest  extended  to  David,  as  has  been  mentioned  before. 
Saul  sent  fcr  Ahimelech,  the  high  priest,  and  his  father-house, 
numbering  eighty-eight  men,  who,  appearing  before  the  king, 
were  accused  of  high  treason.  In  vain  Ahimelech  defended 
himself  by  a  profound  ignorance  of  what  had  occurred  between 
the  king  and  David ;  they  were  condemned  to  death.  But  there 
was  none  among  his  attendants  to  execute  the  horrible  decree 
of  the  king,  and  Doag,  the  Idumean,  was  made  the  executioner; 
after  which  Saul  dispatched  a  body  of  soldiers  to  Nob,  who  by 
order  of  the  king,  exterminated  all  living  beings  of  that  place, 
where  the  Gibeonites  also  suffered  (II  Samuel  xxi,  2).  This 
was  a  bad  and  bloody  policy;  he  thought  to  strike  terror  into 
every  heart,  and  thus  to  frighten  every  one  from  aiding  David 
(Psalm  Hi),  but  it  had  just  a  contrary  effect;  Ebiathar,  the  son 
of  Ahimilech,  the  only  one  escaping  the  outrageous  slaughter, 
went  to  David  with  the  priestly  apparels,  who  received  him 
kindly  and  promised  him  his  protection.  David  had  now  not 
only  the  prophets  for  his  cause,  but  also  the  priests,  who  were 
loyally  attached  to  Saul  up  to  the  occurrence  of  that  event. 
Many,  also,  of  David's  companions  at  arms,  and  even  foreign- 


CHAPTER  VII.  315 

ers  and  men  dissatisfied  with  the  government  of  Saul,  joined 
David  in  his  castle,  so  that  he  became  a  terror  to  Saul.  The 
prophet,  Gad,  invited  David  to  come  into  the  interior  of  Jehudah. 
The  prophet  appears  to  have  been  a  messenger  of  Samuel,  and 
therefore  we  shall  see  David  from  this  moment  struggling  to 
maintain  himself  in  the  land  of  Jehudah,  although  being  ex- 
posed there  to  considerable  danger  and  peril,  lie  went  up  to 
I  he  forest  of  Hareth,  where  he  was  informed  that  the  Phelis- 
tincs  were  committing  depredations  in  Keilah,  and  he  resolved 
to  attack  them.  His  men  reluctantly  followed  him.  He  went 
to  that  city,  expelled  the  enemy  and  stayed  there  until  Saul 
learned  it  and  had  sent  a  body  of  troops  to  beseige  him  there, 
when  he  left  that  place  and  went  to  Horshah,  in  the  desert  of 
Jehudah;  in  that  part  of  it  called  the  wildnerness  of  Sif. 
When  at  that  place  he  was  visited  by  Jonathan.  They  renewed 
their  covenant  of  friendship,  and  Jonathan  bid  him  be  cheerful, 
as  his  father  would  not  be  able  to  injure  him,  that  David  would 
be  king,  and  Jonathan  second  to  him  in  authority. 

Some  of  the  inhabitants  of  that  desert  (according  to  Psalm  liv, 
they  were  foreigners)  told  Saul  that  David  was  in  their  vicinity. 
The  Sifites  brought  to  Saul  an  accurate  description  of  the 
region  which  David  occupied.  Saul  surprised  David,  who  tied 
from  Saul  and  his  men,  closely  pursued  by  them,  so  that  it 
appeared  impossible  to  escape.  At  this  juncture,  however, 
Saul  was  called  to  defend  himself  against  the  Phelistines,  but 
having  terminated  the  trouble  in  that  quarter,  he  again  set  out 
with  three  thousand  men  to  take  David,  who  was  now  at  the 
rocks  of  En-Gedi.  When  on  the  march,  Saul  happened  to  go 
alone  into  a  cave  at  the  other  end  of  which  David  and  some  of 
his  men  were  resting.  David  went  up  to  Saul  and  cut  a  piece 
of  his  cloak,  despising  the  mean  advice  of  his  men,  to  assas- 
sinate the  king,  and  restraining  them  from  pursuing  after 
Saul.  David,  however,  followed  after  him,  and  told  him  in  the 
most  respectful  language,  that  he  was  in  his  hands,  that  he 
could  have  killed  him,  as  the  part  of  his  cloak  plainly  proved; 
but  that  he  should  never  lay  hands  on  the  Messiah  of  the  Lord. 
Saul  was  overcome  by  this  token  of  respect,  mercy,  and  mag- 


316  PERIOD    III. 

nanimity,  by  one  whom  he  persecuted  so  sternly.  He  confessed 
that  David  was  great  and  good,  and  promised  to  disturb  him 
no  more. 

It  can  not  be  ascertained  whether  David  acted  so  magnani- 
mously on  account  of  Jonathan  and  of  Michal  his  wife,  or  on 
account  of  respect  for  the  king  of  Israel;  or  on  account  of  a 
sound  policy,  not  to  profane  the  royal  dignity  to  which  he 
aspired,  which  had  plenty  of  opponents,  and  not  to  break  for- 
ever with  the  friends  of  Saul.  But  so  much  is  sure,  that  the 
conclusion  of  I  Samuel  xxiv,  is  not  likely  to  have  been  said  by 
the  haughty  and  enraged  king.  The  same  story  of  Saul  and 
David  is  narrated  again  in  chapter  xxvi,  where  the  place  of 
the  piece  cut  from  the  cloak  of  Saul  in  the  cave  is  supplied  by 
a  daring  act  of  David,  who  went  in  the  death  of  night,  ac- 
companied by  Abishai  and  by  Ahimelech  of  Gath,  into  the 
king's  camp,  stealing  his  spear  and  cup,  and  thus  demonstrat- 
ing his  loyalty,  which  ends  with  a  reconciliation  of  Saul  and 
David.  It  is  plain,  that  both  chapters  relate  to  the  same  fact, 
which  was  differently  narrated;  both  of  which  indicate  but  one 
purpose,  which  is  to  say  that  no  blood  was  shed  in  the  perse- 
cution of  David  by  Saul;  that  it  was  by  the  moderation, 
prudence  and  loyalty  of  David  that  no  blood  was  shed. 

David  and  his  men  stayed  after  this  in  the  wilderness  of 
Paran,  where  they  tarried  for  some  time,  protecting  the  flocks 
of  Israelites  against  the  roving  inhabitants  of  the  deserts  (I 
Samuel,  xxv,  15,  21),  for  which  he  seems  to  have  received  rich 
presents  from  the  owners  of  the  flocks.  A  man,  called  Nabal, 
who  lived  in  Maon  and  had  his  cattle  in  Carmel,  was  one 
of  the  richest  sons  of  the  tribe  of  Jehudah.  His  flocks  were 
protected*  by  the  men  of  David.  When  therefore  he  sheared 
his  sheep,  David  sent  to  him  asking  of  him  some  presents. 
The  messengers  of  David  used  a  courteous  language,  peculiar 
to  the  author  of  Samuel.  But  Nabal  told  them  that  he  did 
not  know  David,  as  there  were  so  many  servants  who  were  dis- 
obedient to  their  masters.  David  on  receiving  this  answer  was 
much  provoked,  and  bid  his  men  to  prepare  their  arms,  and  to 
follow  him;  four  hundred  followed  him,  and  two  hundred  re- 


CHAPTER    VII.  317 

mained  at  the  camp.  David  was  on  the  point  of  shedding  the 
blood  of  his  countryman,  which  might  have  greatly  reduced 
him  in  the  estimation  of  the  people ;  but  Abigail,  the  wife  of 
Nabal,  who  had  been  informed  of  the  rude  demeanor  of  her 
husband  towards  the  messengers  of  David,  and  had  predicted 
the  misfortune  which  might  overcome  him,  hastened  to  meet 
and  to  appease  David,  in  which  she  fortunately  succeeded. 
The  conversation  between  Abigail  and  David  is  again  remark- 
able for  the  refined  politeness  and  courtesy  which  distinguished 
that  age.  When  Nabal  died,  which  was  shortly  after  this, 
David  married  Abigail,  besides  whom  he  also  married  Ahinoam 
of  Jezreel;  his  first  wife,  Michal,  daughter  of  Saul,  had  been 
given  to  another  man. 

These  incidents,  however  sterile  they  are  in  a  historical 
respect,  give  us  an  insight  into  the  state  of  affairs  during  the 
reign  of  Saul.     The  government  had  become  almost  despotic. 

No  mention  is  made  after  the  war  with  Amalek  of  a  national 
will  or  influence,  no  prophet  announced  to  Saul  the  will  of 
God;  he  massacred  the  priests;  held  a  standing  army;  perse- 
cuted David  without  asking  of  any  one  permission.  Samuel 
attended  to  his  school  at  Ramah,  retired  from  public  business, 
and  Gad,  the  only  prophet  mentioned,  favored  the  cause  of 
David.  Abiathar,  the  only  descendant  of  the  high  priest,  was 
with  the  ephod  among  the  men  of  David,  and  it  is  not  stated 
that  another  high  priest  was  appointed,  still  it  appears  to  us. 
that  Zadok  was  the  successor  of  Ahimelech.  The  Phelistines 
continued  to  invade  the  frontiers,  and  frequently  succeeded  in 
coming  into  the  interior  of  Jehudah  and  Dan,  and  plundering 
the  inhabitants;  we  find  them  once  in  Keilah  (I  Samuel  xxiii. 
1),  and  once  in  Bethlehem  (II  Samuel,  xxiii,  14).  The  internal 
disorder  and  mismanagement  were  the  cause  of  neglect  in 
watching  the  frontiers.  The  southern  part  of  Jehudah  also  was 
unsafe,  so  that  David  and  his  men  were  welcome  to  the  shep- 
herds and  herdsmen  as  faithful  guardians.  David  studiously 
avoided  every  thing  which  could  increase  the  jealousy  of  Saul; 
still  he  liked  to  hear  others  speak  of  his  prospects  to  the  throne. 
He  confronted  dangers    and  perils  of  all  kinds,  still   he  never 


318  PERIOD    III. 

left  the  country  of  Jelmdah,  not  venturing  to  enter  other  parts 
of  the  land;  which  shows  that  the  authority  of  Saul  was  every- 
where in  Israel  more  firmly  established  than  in  Jelmdah,  which 
tribe  had  already  omitted  to  send  its  proper  number  of  warriors 
in  the  war  against  Amalek.*  It  appears,  therefore,  that  this 
tribe  was  most  dissatisfied,  and  therefore  they  gave  shelter  to 
David,  or  probably  occasioned  him  to  revolt  against  the  author- 
ity of  Saul.  Saul  punished  them  by  exposing  them  to  the 
incursions  of  the  Phelistines  and  the  tribes  of  the  southern 
desert,  which  satisfactorily  explains  the  subsequent  course  of 
David.  It  appears,  therefore,  that  the  government  of  Saul  was 
despotic  and  strong,  that  the  material  wealth  of  the  nation 
increased,  and  that  science  and  art  made  considerable  progress 
among  the  people;  that  the  tribe  of  Jelmdah,  the  prophets  and 
the  priests,  together  with  David  and  his  men,  the  republicans 
still  remaining  in  the  land,  and  the  Phelistines  could  not  check 
the  government  of  Saul,  although  they  considerably  impaired 
his  strength,  which  made  Saul  furious  and  cruel. 

Samuel,  who  had  laid  the  foundation  for  the  present  state  of 
things,  and  who  lived  to  see  the  fulfillment  of  his  predictions 
in  regard  to  monarchy,  died  at  Eamah;  and  the  people  assem- 
bled in  large  numbers  to  do  the  last  honors  to  a  man  who  had 
regenerated  the  nation,  and  who  would  have  made  them  great 
and  happy,  had  they  paid  more  regard  to  his  words.  We  Can 
not  say  how  old  he  was  when  he  died;  he  must  have  been  very 
old,  if  we  set  his  death  towards  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Saul. 
The  only  man  who  exercised  an  indirect  influence  upon 
Saul,  which  he  maintained  even  after  his  death,  had  gone  home 
into  the  eternal  habitation  of  his  fathers;  therefore,  David  no 
longer  thought  himself  secure  in  the  land,  nor  was  he  able  to 
protect  both  boundaries  of  Jehudah  at  once;  he,  therefore, 
thought  of  making  terms  with  Achash,  king  of  Gath,  who 
received  him  as  a  welcome  ally  against  Saul.  Achash  gave  to 
David  the  fortified  Ziklag,  at  the  frontiers  of  Jehudah,  which 
David  desired  in  order  to  maintain  the  connection  with  his 

*  Compare  I  Sam .  xv,  4,  with  xi,  8. 


CHAPTER   VII.  319 

tribe,  and  to  watch  them  against  Phclistine  incursions.  He 
made  excursions  to  the  south  of  Jehudah,  to  protect  them 
against  the  roving  expeditions  of  the  tribes  inhabiting  the 
desert.  Achash,  however,  supposed  he  undertook  expe- 
ditions against  Jehudah  having  turned  an  enemy  to  his  own 
country,  which  enabled  David  the  better  to  pursue  undisturbed 
his  own  course  of  actions.  Achash  had  no  objections  against 
the  prudent  and  heroic  David,  and  entrusted  him  with  the  en- 
tire management  of  his  own  affairs. 

The  Phelistines,  as  it  must  be  remembered,  were  always  most 
desirous  to  break  through  Dan  and  Benjamin  to  the  Jordan, 
for  the  purpose  already  stated,  of  having  a  highway  to  the 
interior  of  Asia;  but  there  they  always  came  between  Jehudah 
and  Ephraim,  which  two  tribes  they  naturally  considered  their 
worst  enemies.  They  gladly  saw  David  engaged  with  Jehudah, 
not  much  caring  in  what  way;  their  design  was  to  be  safe  on 
that  side,  so  that  they  could  march  their  armies  on  Ephraim, 
which  they  did  for  the  first  time  in  all  their  numerous  cam- 
paigns against  Israel.  They  must  have  done  so  soon  after 
David  had  come  to  Ziklag;  for  he  was  in  Ziklag  no  longer 
than  sixteen  months  (I  Samuel  xxvii,  7);  he  went  from  Ziklag 
immediately  after  the  death  of  Saul  (II  Samuel  ii),  who  fell  on 
Mount  Gilboah,  in  Issachar;  it  certainly  took  the  Phelistines 
more  than  a  year  to  force  their  way  through  Dan,  Ephraim  and 
Manasseh.  The  historian  narrates  only  the  end  of  the  war,  as 
this  is  the  case  everywhere  in  the  records  of  the  Judges ;  but 
the  history  of  the  war  itself  we  do  not  possess.  An  old  docu- 
ment, which  the  author  of  I  Chronicles  has  preserved  for  us 
(xii),  fully  accounts  for  the  success  of  the  Phelistines  against 
Saul.  Besides,  the  whole  army  of  Jehudah,  which  did  not 
assist  the  king,  warriors  and  high  officers  of  the  army  of  the 
tribes  of  Benjamin,  Gad  and  Manasseh,  came  to  Ziklag  to  make 
common  cause  with  David.  It  appears,  therefore,  that  Saul 
had  also  lost  the  confidence  of  the  warriors,  which  fully  accounts 
for  the  discouraged  state  in  which  we  shall  see  him  a  day 
before  the  battle;  and,  therefore,  the  author  of  I  Samuel  men- 
tions no  numbers  when  giving  us  an  account  of  the  last  battle 


320  PERIOD   III. 

of  Saul.  When  the  war  began,  David  joined  the  ranks  of  the 
Phelistines  at  the  express  command  of  Achash,  who  made  David 
and  his  men  his  body  guard.  It  is  not  easily  to  be  determined, 
whether  David  would  have  fought  against  his  own  nation, 
which  he  always  studiously  avoided.  Circumstances  as  they 
were,  forced  him  either  to  fight  his  own  brethren  as  an  ally  of 
a  foreign  enemy,  or  to  betray  his  friend  and  patron.  We  have 
no  reasonable  ground  for  deciding  either  way.  But  lucky  as  he 
was  in  every  respect,  he  was  happily  redeemed  from  this  peril- 
ous position.  The  princes  of  the  Phelistines  insisted  upon 
sending  him  back  to  Ziklag,  having  no  confidence  in  his 
fidelity.  Achash  yielded  to  his  officers,  and  told  David  in  very 
courteous  terms,  that  he  was  bound  to  refuse  his  cooperation 
in  the  present  campaign.  David  returned  early  the  next  morn- 
ing to  Ziklag;  but,  to  his  surprise,  he  found  the  city  demolished, 
the  guards  slain,  women  and  children  carried  away  captives, 
and  every  thing  left  in  the  city  fallen  into  the  hands  of  the 
enemy.  The  Amalekites,  undoubtedly,  in  connection  with 
other  tribes  of  the  desert,  had  improved  the  chance  to  take 
vengeance  on  David,  who  restrained  them  from  invading 
Jehudah. 

Followed  by  six  hundred  of  his  men,  David  pursued  after  the 
roving  party  in  great  haste;  but,  when  reaching  Creek  Besur, 
two  hundred  of  them  could  march  no  longer,  and  he  was  obliged 
to  continue  his  pursuit  with  but  four  hundred  men.  A  man 
was  found  in  the  desert,  who,  after  having  been  given  food, 
said  he  was  an  Egyptian,  a  servant  of  an  Amalekite,  who,  on 
account  of  having  fallen  sick  left  him  there,  where  he  had  no 
food  for  three  days  and  nights.  He  farther  stated,  that  they 
were  roaming  in  the  southern  part  of  Jehudah  and  Kerethi, 
and  that  they  burned  Ziklag  with  fire.  The  Egyptian,  after 
having  been  promised  protection,  acted  as  a  guide,  and  so  David 
overtook  the  roving  party  encamped  on  an  oasis,  eating  and 
drinking;  he  assaulted  them,  a  hot  conflict  ensued,  which  lasted 
for  twenty-four  hours,  and  which  resulted  in  the  utter  defeat 
of  Amalek,  of  whose  force  four  hundred,  riding  on  camels, 
betook  themselves   to  flight.     The  women   and  children  were 


CHAPTER  VII.  321 

liberated,  the  goods  and  cattle  taken,  and  they  returned  to  the 
Creek  Besnr.  The  victors  disliked  to  divide  the  spoil  with 
those  tarrying  at  the  Creek;  but  David  decided  in  favor  of 
those  who  remained  behind,  that  they  should  have  their  part 
of  the  spoil,  which  must  have  been  considerable;  for  on  having 
reached  Ziklag,  David  sent  presents  to  the  elders  of  those  towns 
in  Jehudah,  who  had  supported  him  and  his  men,  when  he  was 
a  fugitive  amongst  them.  It  was  necessary  for  us  to  narrate 
this  incident  in  support  of  our  statement,  that  David,  while  in 
Ziklag,  protected  the  frontiers  of  Jehudah,  which  were  neg- 
lected by  Saul. 

The  Phelistines  marched  their  united  armies  upon  Mount 
Ephraim,  and  succeeded  in  breaking  through  the  whole  country. 
Saul  saw  himself  deserted  by  the  prophets,  by  the  priests  and 
other  eloquent  men,  who  might  have  inspired  the  warriors  to  a 
desperate  struggle.  He  saw  himself  beaten  on  all  points,  and 
had  retreated  across  the  whole  country,  being  now  encamped 
on  Mount  Gilboah,  near  Jordan.  He  saw  himself  deserted  by 
his  principal  warriors,  and  the  number  of  his  men  encamped 
on  Mount  Gilboah,  was  certainly  but  inconsiderable.  His  cou- 
rage failed;  he  became  conscious  of  the  great  fault  he  had 
committed,  in  trying  to  govern  a  nation  of  republicans  without 
allowing  them  a  proper  share  in  the  government.  He  saw  him- 
self now  deserted  by  that  nation  whom  he  tried  to  subject  to 
his  own  will.  He  remembered  the  well-intended  reprimands 
and  exhortations  of  Samuel,  and  he  could  not  repress  the  desire 
of  consulting  that  wise  statesman;  but  he  was  dead.  Super- 
stition, the  inevitable  consequence  of  self-contempt  and  remorse, 
had  now  overtaken  Saul,  and  was  dragging  him  to  despair.  He 
could  neither  eat  nor  drink;  he  saw  himself  approaching  a  fear- 
ful crisis,  the  issue  of  which  was  too  certain;  for'what  could 
he  do  with  his  handful  of  discouraged  men,  in  opposition  to  a 
large,  spirited,  and  victorious  army?  Finally,  superstition 
triumphed  over  the  suspended  faculties  of  his  mind.  A  man 
in  despair  has  lost  his  manhood,  and  becomes  a  credulous 
child.  He  went,  disguised,  and  in  company  of  two  men,  to  the 
witch  of  Endor,  and  bid  her  conjure  up  the  deceased  Samuel^ 
21 


322  PERIOD    III. 

The  cunning  woman  soon  recognized  the  pale,  down-hearted 
and  despairing  king.  She  must  have  known  the  state  of  things ; 
every  one  in  the  country  must  have  known  them ;  she  must 
have  seen  in  the  countenance  of  the  king,  that  he  could  not 
outlive  the  next  two  or  three  days,  and  so  it  was  easy  for  her 
to  answer  for  Samuel.  Perhaps  she  also  knew,  what  impres- 
sion her  answer  would  make  upon  the  king,  who  came  to  her  as 
the  last  means  to  be  fried,  as  he  himself  stated  (I  Samuel 
xxviii,  15);  and  probably  she  thought  of  taking  vengeance  on 
Saul,  for  his  having  persecuted  her  sister-laborers  in  the  country. 
She  told  the  king  that  she  had  conjured  up  the  man  whom  he 
desired.  On  the  request  of  the  king,  she  described  the  man's 
dress,  corresponding  to  that  of  Samuel,  whom  she  might  have 
seen  frequently.  Saul,  who  did  not  see  the  man,  bowed  down 
before  the  phantom  described  by  the  woman.  On  asking  the 
supposed  Samuel,  the  king  was  answered  the  words  which  this 
prophet  once  told  him  at  Gilgal.  "  The  Lord  will  tear  the 
kingdom  from  thy  hands,"  to  which  the  woman  added,  "And 
he  will  give  it  to  thy  neighbor,  to  David;"  he  was  also  told  that 
he  and  his  sons  would  be  with  Samuel  to-morrow.  Here  Saul 
fainted  and  fell  to  the  floor;  he,  who  had  fought  in  so  many 
battles,  fainted;  how  deranged  must  his  mind  have  been  before 
he  came,  and  during  the  scene.  The  words  of  the  prophet, 
which  had  most  likely  become  a  common  proverb,  had  gnawed 
for  years  on  his  proud  heart ;  these  words  were  now  sufficient 
to  exhaust  his  remaining  strength.  The  woman  raised  him 
from  the  floor,  made  him  sit  on  the  bed,  and  partake  of  the 
meal  she  had  prepared  for  him.  He  then  repaired  the  same 
night  to  his  camp. 

Next  day  the  Phelistines  stormed  the  heights,  of  which  they 
soon  became  masters ;  the  Israelites  fled  or  were  slain  on  all 
points;  Saul  and  his  three  sons,  among  whom  was  the  noble 
Jonathan,  knowing  that  their  entire  glory  lay  in  dying  honora- 
bly, fought  lion-like  till  the  last;  Jonathan  and  his  two 
brothers  died  upon  the  field  of  honor  like  men  and  heroes; 
Saul  fled,  and  ended  in  suicide,  to  accomplish  which  his  strength 
and  courage  failed;  at  his  request  an  Amalekite  made  an  end  of 


CHAPTER   VII.  323 

his  pains.  His  arm-bearer  had  refused  to  kill  his  master,  but 
he  could  not  outlive  him,  and  he  also  put  an  end  to  his  life  by 
the  side  of  the  dying  king.  The  army  of  Saul  was  annihilated; 
the  whole  country  exposed  to  the  mercy  of  the  Phelistines ;  the 
people  sought  refuge  in  the  fortified  cities;  the  plains  were 
deserted,  and  the  Phelistines  took  possession  of  them.  Such 
a  state  of  affairs  is  not  recorded  in  Israelitish  histoiy,  since 
the  days  of  the  Midianite  and  Phelistine  invasion.  This  was 
the  work  of  the  first  monarch  in  Israel,  who  lived  unhappily, 
died  miserably,  and  threw  his  country  into  the  depth  of  mis- 
fortune and  shameful  subjection.  The  despotic  rule  of  Saul 
was  sufficient  to  hold  down  the  enemies  of  the  dynasty  to 
maintain  order  in  the  country;  but  it  checked  the  patriotism  of 
the  multitude,  depriving  them  of  that  higher  inspiration  which 
makes  a  nation  truly  great  and  invincible.  It  made  them  in- 
different to  public  affairs,  caring  little  for  what  the  king  did  in 
peace  or  in  war;  and  as  Saul  could  not  resist  effectually  the 
spirited  attack  of  the  invaders,  he  must  fall  upon  the  ruin  of 
Israel's  national  superiority. 

When  the  Phelistines  came  to  take  the  spoil  from  their  slain 
enemies,  they  found  to  their  astonishment  Saul  and  his  sons 
among  the  slain.  They  sent  the  head  and  the  arms  of  Saul 
through  the  whole  of  their  land,  announcing  the  tidings  of  their 
signal  victory,  and  nailed  the  bodies  of  Saul  and  his  three  sons 
on  the  walls  of  Bethshen.  The  brave  citizens  of  Jabesh 
Gilead  rose  at  night,  and,  risking  their  lives,  succeeded  in  re- 
moving the  bodies  of  Saul  and  his  sons,  and,  bringing  them  to 
their  own  city,  they  buried  them  with  all  the  honors  due  to  the 
remains  of  such  high  dignitaries  of  the  nation.  This  was  a 
noble  act  of  gratitude  on  the  part  of  the  citizens  of  Jabesh 
towards  Saul,  who  had  delivered  them  from  the  hands  of  Am- 
nion. Abner,  son  of  Ner,  chief  captain  of  the  host,  was 
faithfully  attached  to  the  house  of  his  royal  master.  He  es- 
caped with  one  of  the  princes,  Ish  Boshcth,  and  reached 
Mahanaim  beyond  Jordan.  Ish  Bosheth  was  received  as  the 
legitimate  successor  of  the  late  monarch,  and  the  whole  district 
east  of  the  Jordan  acknowledged  him  as  their  king.     Gradu- 


324  PERIOD     III. 

ally,  in  five  years,  he  was  acknowledged  king  over  all  Israel 
except  Jehudah,  after  Abner  had  retaken  the  country  from  the 
hands  of  the  Phelistines.  The  north,  Asher,  Naphthali  and 
Zebulon,  as  well  as  Benjamin,  were  not  in  the  hands  of  the 
Phelistines,  consequently  they  soon  acknowledged  the  authority 
of  Ish  Bosheth;  but  the  other  tribes  were  under  the  dominion 
of  the  Phelistines,  from  which  they  had  to  be  rescued,  before 
they  could  be  attached  to  the  royal  house. 

Our  sources  are  altogether  silent  on  this  point ;  still  we  have 
in  them  certain  hints  from  which  we  infer  that  it  took  Abner 
five  years  before  he  succeeded  in  having  the  authority  of  Ish 
Bosheth  acknowledged  throughout  all  Israel,  over  whom  he 
reigned  two  years,  and  was  then  assassinated.  It  is  stated 
twice  in  Samuel,  once  in 'Kings  and  once  in  Chronicles,  that 
David  ruled  over  Jehudah  in  Hebron  seven  years — to  which  six 
months  are  added  in  some  of  the  statements — and  thirty-three 
years  over  all  Israel.  There  can  be  no  mistake  on  this  point; 
the  statements  are  too  often  repeated  to  admit  of  doubt.  David 
could  not  be  considered  king  of  Jehudah  as  long  as  Saul  lived, 
being  himself  compelled  to  reside  in  a  foreign  country;  and 
besides  this  it  is  stated  in  unquestionable  terms  (II.  Samuel  ii) 
that  David  was  anointed  king  of  Jehudah  after  the  death  of 
Saul.  He  never  considered  himself  a  king  previous  to  this 
time.  Still  we  are  informed  in  the  same  chapter  that  Ish 
Bosheth  reigned  but  two  years  over  all  Israel,  consequently  it 
must  have  taken  Abner  five  years  to  establish  the  authority  of 
Ish  Bosheth  over  all  Israel.  The  writer  omits  the  account  of 
occurrences  at  that  time,  because  it  is  his  avowed  object  to 
establish  the  legitimate  claim  of  the  Davidian  dynasty  to  the 
throne  of  Israel  on  the  ground  of  hereditary  rights,  originally 
resting  on  a  divine  appointment  to  the  royal  dignity.  But 
Saul's  claims,  though  resting  on  the  same  ground,  were  lost  by 
a  sinful  life,  and  by  the  conquest  of  the  Phelistines.  If  Saul's 
life  was  not  a  sinful  one,  and  the  country  was  not  conquered 
by  the  Phelistines,  David  had  no  legal  claim  to  the  throne. 
The  opposition  David  offered  to  the  house  of  Saul,  before  he 
was  elected  of  all  Israel,  would  have  been  an  open  revolution. 


CHAPTER  VII.  325 

He  is  therefore  eager  to  show  to  the  reader,  that  David  him- 
self never  claimed  the  royal  dignity  as  long  as  Saul  lived,  he 
was  persecuted  for  what  he  may  have  thought  or  desired,  but 
not  for  any  revolutionary  act  of  his.  After  the  death  of  Saul, 
the  land  was  conquered  by  the  Phelis tines,  and  as  there  was  no 
king  de  facto  David  had  a  right  to  aspire  to  the  throne.  But 
according  to  the  words  of  David  (II  Samuel  iii,  33,  34,  38), 
Abner  was  a  great  man  and  well  beloved  by  the  people ;  still 
we  know  nothing  great  of  him,  if  it  be  not,  that  he  retook  the 
land  from  the  Phelistines.  We  therefore  fix  the  chronology 
thus;  Ish  Bosheth  reigned  five  years  before  his  authority  was 
established  over  the  whole  of  Israel,  and  two  years  after  this; 
during  which  time  David  was  king  of  Jehudah  only ;  after  this 
he  resided  six  months  longer  in  Hebron  before  he  took  Zion. 

The  young  Amalekite  who  had  made  a  final  end  to  the  life 
of  Saul,  took  the  crown  and  the  bracelets  of  Saul  and  brought 
them  to  David  at  Ziklag,  expecting  a  good  reward.  But  after 
lie  had  communicated  his  story,  David  ordered  him  to  be 
killed,  because  he  had  laid  hand  on  the  Messiah  of  the  Lord, 
upon  which  terms  David  usually  laid  a  particular  stress. 
David  had  no  right,  according  to  the  Mosaic  law,  to  condemn 
the  Amalekite  to  death;  but  he  wished  to  remove  every  sus- 
picion of  being  implicated  in  the  regicide.  David  mourned 
publicly  "for  Saul,  his  son  Jonathan,  and  the  people  of  the 
Lord  which  fell  by  the  sword;"  he  eternized  the  melancholy 
event  by  a  beautiful  elegy  (II  Samuel  i,  19-27),  in  which  he 
deeply  mourns  the  loss  of  Jonathan,  and  speaks  in  high  terms 
of  Saul. 

His  next  undertaking  was  to  march  upon  Hebron,  the 
strongest  city  in  Jehudah,  and  in  the  centre  of  that  tribe  and 
Simeon,  which  was  inhabited  by  priests  (Joshua  xxi,  11), 
where  he  was  deservedly  received  with  open  arms.  The  men 
of  Jehudah  met  in  Hebron,  and  anointed  him  their  king.  His 
next  step  was  to  send  messengers  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jabesh 
Gilead  to  express  to  them  his  sympathy,  and  also  his  admira- 
tion for  their  valorous  act  in  taking  the  bodies  of  Saul  and  his 
sons  from  the  walls  of  Bethshen ;  but  he  did  not  forget  to  tell 


826  PERIOD   III. 

them  "  Therefore  now  let  your  hands  be  strengthened  and  be 
ye  valiant,  for  your  master  Saul  is  dead,  and  also  the  house  of 
Jehudah  have  anointed  me  king  over  them;"  but  the  inhabit- 
ants of  Jabcsh  did  not  respond.  David  expected  to  gain 
peaceable  possession  of  the  throne.  He  knew  he  was  the 
favorite  of  the  tribe  of  Jehudah,  of  the  prophets,  and  of  the 
priests;  he  was  formerly  the  favorite  of  the  people,  and  had 
now  with  him  high  officers  of  different  tribes;  he  must  have 
been  of  the  opinion  that  his  election  would  meet  with  no  con- 
siderable, objections.  But  his  long  separation  from  the  army, 
and  the  trouble  he  caused  Saul  must  have  estranged  him  in 
some  measure  from  the  people;  the  melancholy  end  of  Saul 
and  of  his  sons  claimed  general  sympathy,  which  Ish  Bosheth 
and  the  energetic  Abner  well  used  in  favor  of  the  former,  and 
to  the  prejudice  of  David.  Besides  this,  there  were  yet  other 
obstacles  in  the  way  of  David.  Benjamin,  certainly  faithful  to 
the  cause  of  Saul's  heir,  separated  him  from  the  tribes  beyond 
Jordan;  and  Ephraim,  held  by  the  Phelistines,  separated  him 
from  the  northern  tribes.  He  could  not,  without  being  a 
base  traitor,  attack  the  Phelistines;  and  so  he  was  limited  to 
Jehudah  and  Simeon  only.  We  see  him  five  years  long  in 
Hebron  in  perfect  inactivity  in  regard  to  internal  affairs,  or  at 
least  doing  nothing  which  the  author  of  II  Samuel  found  worth 
noticing.  Not  till  Abner  had  expelled  the  Phelistines  did  the 
civil  war  commence,  which  was  the  next  consequence  of  the 
monarchy  so  much  opposed  by  Samuel.  Abner  seems  to  have 
been  the  aggressor,  for  he  marched  his  men  from  Mahanaim, 
the  residence  of  Ish  Bosheth,  to  Gibeon  in  Benjamin;  if  he  had 
not,  still  David  must  have  thought  he  had  the  intention  of 
attacking  him,  and  Abner  certainly  thought  he  had  a  right  to 
do  so.  Joab,  the  chief  captain  of  David,  watched  the  northern 
frontiers.  Abner  and  Joab,  each  having  but  a  few  men  with 
them,  had  an  interview  at  a  pond,  most^likely  on  the  boundary 
between  Benjamin,  Dan,  and  Jehudah.  The  men  were  sitting 
on  both  sides  of  the  pond  apparently  with  no  evil  intention. 
Abner  desired  Joab  to  permit  some  of  his  men  to  measure 
their   strength  and  military  skill  with  some  of   his  men,  in 


CHAPTER    VII.  327 

single  combats,  to  which  Joab  agreed.  Twelve  on  each  side 
entered  upon  the  tournament,  but  they  made  earnest  of  the  joke, 
and  some  of  them  fell,  which  gave  rise  to  a  hot  conflict,  end- 
ing in  a  defeat  and  retreat  of  Abner.  Of  the  brothers  of  Joab, 
present  at  the  action,  one  Ashahcl  was  an  eminent  pedestrian; 
he  run  a  long  time  by  the  side  of  Abner,  who,  not  knowing  his 
intention,  cautioned  him  several  times  to  leave  him,  as  he 
did  not  Avish  to  kill  the  brother  of  Joab.  But  Ashahcl 
heeded  not,  and  Abner,  being  in  danger  at  every  step,  killed 
Ashahel.  When  Joab  and  his  brother  Abishai  came  to  the 
spot  where  the  body  of  their  brother  laid,  they  were  infuriated, 
and  continued  their  pursuit  to  Gibath  Amah,  where  they  ar- 
rived at  eveninsr,  and  where  Abner  awaited  them,  having 
reinforced  his  ranks.  Abner  bade  Joab  return  in  peace,  which 
Joab  thought  it  most  expedient  to  do.  He  came  in  the  morning 
to  Hebron,  with  a  loss  of  nineteen  men;  but  the  author  adds, 
that  Abner  lost  three  hundred  and  sixty  men,  which  seems 
somewhat  improbable.  This  was  the  beginning  of  a  civil  war, 
of  which  our  author  gives  us  no  other  account;  there  was  cer- 
tainly nothing  interesting  in  it  as  regards  David  and  his  army. 
He  only  informs  us  of  the  continual  success  of  David  and 
decline  of  Ish  Bosheth,  which  is  proved  by  the  sequel.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  Ish  Bosheth  was  an  insignificant  man, 
playing  a  part  by  the  aid  of  Abner  only;  while  David  himself, 
an  energetic  and  shrewd  statesman  and  soldier,  was  assisted 
by  such  men  as  Joab  and  the  prophet  Gad.  It  is  very  natural 
that  David  should  have  obtained  the  ascendency  over  the  house 
of  Saul. 

The  final  catastrophe  of  the  reign  of  Ish  Bosheth  is  thus 
communicated  to  us.  Ish  Bosheth  accused  Abner  of  having 
seduced  Rizpah,  the  concubine  of  Saul,  which  was  equivalent 
to  accusing  him  of  a  desire  to  usurp  for  himself  the  royal 
power  (vide  II  Samuel  xvi,  21).  This  grieved  Abner  the  more, 
as  he  knew  himself  innocent.  He  thought  of  being  avenged 
on  Ish  Bosheth,  and  at  the  same  time  of  freeing  himself  of 
that  mean  accusation.  He  sent  messengers  to  David,  offering 
him  his  services  in  turning  the  current  of  popular  favor  to  his 


328  PERIOD    III. 

interests,  which  might  have   been  easy,   as  the  deficiencies  of 
Ish  Bosheth  became  too  visible  when  compared  with  David. 

The  messengers  were  favorably  received  by  David,  and 
Abner  was  invited  to  come  to  Hebron  in  order  to  enter  into 
negotiations  with  the  king.  David  at  the  same  time  instructed 
him  to  bring  back  his  first  wife,  Michal,  daughter  of  Saul,  to 
which  end  David  also  dispatched  messengers  to  Ish  Bosheth, 
who  complied  with  the  wishes  of  David,  and  Michal  was  sent 
to  him.  We  do  not  suppose  for  a  moment,  that  David  acted 
so  by  an  impulse  of  affection,  for  he  soon  after  leads  us  to 
believe  that  he  was  not  very  much  attached  to  her  (II  Samuel 
vi,  21-23);  he  had  political  reasons  for  renewing  his  union 
with  the  house  of  Saul,  in  order  to  support  his  claims  to  the 
throne,  and  to  gain  for  his  cause  many  of  the  friends  of  that 
royal  house,  who  had  become  the  opponents  of  Ish  Bosheth. 
Abner  traveled  through  Israel,  and  won  the  hearts  of  the  leaders 
of  the  nation,  also  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  in  favor  of  David. 
He  then  returned  to  David  at  Hebron,  and  brought  him  cheerful 
tidings.  He  was  kindly  and  generously  treated,  and  left  David 
in  order  to  make  farther  preparations  for  the  revolution. 
Abner  was  scarcely  gone,  when  Joab  learned  that  he  was  with 
the  king,  and  under  the  pretext  that  Abner  only  came  to  de- 
ceive David,  he  sent  after  him,  caused  him  to  be  brought 
back  and  treacherously  assassinated  him.  The  author  of  II 
Samuel  informs  us,  that  David  was  ignorant  of  that  horrid 
crime,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  it;  David  was  unable  to 
commit  such  an  unwarranted  murder.  The  death  of  Abner 
certainly  made  no  small  sensation  in  Israel,  and  David  did 
everything  in  his  power  to  convince  the  people  of  his  inno- 
cence in  the  affair;  that  Joab  had  no  political  reason  to  kill 
Abner,  but  merely  to  avenge  the  death  of  his  brother  Ashahel. 
David  gave  to  Abner  a  magnificent  funeral,  passed  a  high 
sounding  eulogy  over  him,  refused  to  take  food  on  that  day, 
and  gave  public  utterance  to  his  abhorence  of  that  foul  crime; 
so  the  people  were  convinced  that  David  had  no  hand  in  the 
affair.  Ish  Bosheth  was  utterly  dismayed  on  hearing  of  the 
death  of  Abner,  knowing  his  inability  to  maintain  himself  on 


CHAPTER    VII.  329 

the  throne.  The  next  event  shows  that  he  was  unable  to  take 
care  of  himself.  Two  officers  of  the  army  of  Ish  Bosheth, 
Baanah  and  Rechab,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  went  in  company 
of  others,  who  came  to  buy  wheat,  into  the  king's  residence, 
where  finding  him  asleep,  they  assassinated  him,  and  cut  off 
his  head,  with  which  they  fled  to  David.  But  the  foul  crime 
was  not  calculated  to  meet  with  the  favor  of  David;  he  ordered 
the  assassins  to  be  publicly  executed,  and  the  head  of  Ish 
Bosheth  to  be  buried  in  the  sepulchre  of  Abner.  David,  as  we 
have  observed  before,  took  great  care  not  to  be  considered  as 
cooperating  in  any  crime,  as  he  was  aware,  that  if  a  crown  be 
obtained  by  foul  contrivances,  the  possessor  may  reign,  but 
can  not  reckon  upon  the  confidence  and  sympathy  of  the  better 
class  of  society.  He  desired  to  establish  a  certain  respect 
and  sacred  awe  before  the  king,  whom  he  always  called  the 
Messiah  of  the  Lord.  Soon  after  this  the  national  council  met, 
and  agreed  to  offer  the  vacant  throne  to  David,  in  consequence 
of  which  the  elders  of  Israel  went  to  Hebron  to  meet  David, 
who  saw  himself  at  the  open  gates  of  the  proud  palace  of  his 
hopes;  he  was  peaceably  and  honorably  elected  by  the  legal 
government  of  the  nation;  he  made  a  covenant  with  them, 
that  is,  he  gave  his  royal  word  to  govern  the  nation  within  the 
limits  of  the  national  law,  after  which  he  was  anointed  king 
of  Israel,  a  proof  that  the  anointing  of  Samuel,  if  it  took 
place  at  all,  was  considered  of  no  avail,  being  an  unofficial 
act.  The  author  of  I  Chronicles,  who  generally  delights  in 
huge  numbers,  informs  us  of  a  vast  army  coming  to  David  on 
that  occasion,  while  we  read  in  Samuel  the  more  credible  state- 
ment of  the  elders  of  Israel  coming  to  Hebron;  still  it  is 
possible  and  even  likely,  that  the  warriors  of  the  different 
tribes  came  to  Hebron  after  the  anointing  of  David,  to  take 
the  oath  of  allegiance,  or  to  congratulate  him,  and  assure  him 
in  some  way  of  their  respect  and  proper  obedience,  We 
learn  from  the  same  source,  that  brilliant  fetes  were  given 
in  Hebron,  to  which  presents  were  brought  from  all  quarters 
of  the  country.  The  joy  was  a  national  and  general  one;  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin  alone  took  no  considerable  part  in  it;  so  that 


330  PERIOD    III. 

even  the  author  of  Chronicles  is  obliged  to  confess  that  but 
three  thousand  warriors  of  Benjamin  came  to  Hebron  to  con- 
gratulate the  king.  It  must  be  confessed  that  there  were  many 
causes  for  that  general  and  national  rejoicing,  of  which  the 
author  of  Chronicles  speaks.  David  entitled  the  friends  of  the 
nation  to  the  most  sanguine  hopes.  He  and  his  friends,  who 
accompanied  him  through  all  the  scenes  of  persecution,  peril, 
and  danger,  were  experienced,  tried  and  heroic  warriors,  pos- 
sessing the  confidence  of  every  man  in  Israel,  and  known  to 
the  opponents  of  Israel  as  bold  and  unyielding  champions. 
The  hope  could  be  entertained  that  he  would  protect  the 
country  more  fully  than  was  ever  done  before.  His  personal 
qualities,  his  eminent  inclination  to  the  sublime  and  beautiful, 
to  poetry  and  music ;  his  good  understanding  with  the  prophets 
and  the  priests;  his  respect  for  the  law  and  its  executors, 
manifested  in  his  behavior  towards  Saul,  promised  a  mild,  just 
and  peaceful  administration,  a  progress  of  literature  and  civil- 
ization, an  efficient  protection  of  the  national  religion,  and  the 
triumph  of  order  and  prosperity.  Besides  this,  it  must  not  be 
forgotten  that  David  had,  aside  from  the  tribe  of  Jehudah, 
numerous  friends,  especially  in  the  provinces  east  of  Jordan,  so 
that  the  election  of  David  to  the  throne  of  Israel  was  a  reunion 
of  the  nation,  which  had  been  disunited  for  more  than  ten 
years. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

ADMINISTRATION  OF  DAVID   (1041—1008,  b.  c). 

The  first  undertaking  of  David  as  king  of  the  whole  nation, 
was  to  besiege  Jerusalem,  the  city  of  the  Jebusite,  from  which 
the  Israelites  had  been  expelled,   most  likely  by  the  agency  of 


CHAPTER   VIII.  331 

the  Phelis tines,  and  which  he  intended  to  make  the  capital  of 
the  land.  He  had  more  than  one  reason  for  doing  this.  First, 
that  city  belonged  jointly  to  Jehudah  and  Benjamin;  he  could 
thus  reconcile  the  two  inimical  tribes,  and  then  have  no  ene- 
mies among  his  own  people.  The  situation  of  Jerusalem,  on 
and  in  the  midst  of  round  or  square  hills,  defended  on  three 
sides  by  ravines,  made  it  a  desirable  spot  for  the  capital  of  a 
land,  which  could  be  defended  with  a  comparatively  small 
number  of  men.  For  David  it  had  the  peculiar  advantage  of 
opening  to  him  an  uninterrupted  communication  with  the 
tribes  beyond  Jordan,  Benjamin  and  Jehudah,  then  the  most 
powerful  tribes  of  Israel.  Agreeably  to  the  Mosaic  law,  the 
Jebusites  were  challenged  to  surrender  the  city  and  the  castle 
of  Zion;  but  they  returned  the  ironical  answer,  that  the  blind 
and  the  lame  were  sufficient  to  defend  the  city,  and  as  long  as 
one  of  them  lived,  David  should  not  take  it.  The  confidence 
of  the  Jebusites  was  not  entirely  built  upon  the  strength  of 
the  city  and  the  castle;  they  reckoned  upon  the  speedy  assist- 
ance of  the  Phelistines,  who  most  likely  were  their  protectors, 
and  who  still  had  possession  of  their  thoroughfare,  to  which 
Jerusalem  was  very  important.  They  actually  appeared  with 
a  considerable  force  and  encamped  on  the  high  plain  of  Re- 
phaim,  separated  from  Mount  Zion  by  the  valley  of  Benhinom, 
and  a  hill,  thus  separating  the  plain  of  Rephaim  from  the  valley 
of  Benhinom,  upon  which  a  fort  stood,  which  was  garrisoned  by 
David  to  check  the  progress  of  the  enemy,  and  prevent  him 
from  uniting  with  the  Jebusites  in  Jerusalem. 

David  on  being  advised  by  the  divine  voice,  revealed  most 
likely  by  the  national  council,  marched  part  of  his  army  across 
the  valley  of  Benhinom  to  the  fort  on  the  hill,  from  which  he 
successfully  attacked  the  Phelistines,  who  were  so  routed,  that 
they  left  on  the  field  their  idols,  probably  attached  to  their 
standards,  which,  on  command  of  David,  were  burnt  by  the 
soldiers,  agreeably  to  the  Mosaic  law.  The  place  of  the  battle 
was  called  Baal  Perazim,  the  men  of  the  siege — according  to 
their  manner  of  taking  fortified  cities,  by  destroying  the  forti- 
fications by  battering  rams — because  his  army  consisted  of  a 


332  PERIOD   III. 

party  of  those  who  besieged  Jerusalem.  David  could  not 
pursue  his  victory,  but  returned  to  the  city,  and  took  it  by 
assault.  No  time  was  to  be  lost;  the  Phelistines  could  return 
any  day,  reorganized  and  reinforced.  David  therefore  promised 
the  rank  of  chief  captain  to  him  who  would  be  first  on  the- 
walls  of  the  castle;  Joab,  the  king's  heroic  cousin,  who  had 
lost  his  rank  in  the  army,  most  likely  on  account  of  having 
assassinated  Abner,  was  the  first  on  the  walls.  He  was  soon 
followed  by  the  invincible  warriors  of  David,  and  Zion  fell  into 
his  power.  But  the  Phelistines  had  again  made  their  appear- 
ance in  the  plain  of  Rephaim.  David,  who  never  put  much  con- 
fidence in  walls,  gates  and  bars,  resolved  to  attack  them  in  the 
open  field;  he  was  advised  this  time  to  give  them  a  total  discom- 
fiture, in  consequence  of  which  he  fetched  a  compass  round 
the  enemy,  and  attacked  their  flanks  and  rear;  when  defeated, 
they  retired  to  Geba,  their  old  standing  place,  from  which  they 
were  driven,  together  with  all  their  garrisons,  as  far  as  to 
Gezer.  We  are  not  informed  that  David  took  Gezer;  this 
much  is  sure,  that  he  was  not  yet  in  the  position  to  pursue  his 
victory ;  it  was  yet  necessary  for  him  to  take  proper  care  of 
the  internal  affairs. 

This  first  campaign  occupied  the  first  six  months  of  his  reign, 
after  which  he  transferred  the  seat  of  government  to  Jerusalem. 
David  repaired  the  breaches  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  and  the 
castle  of  Zion,  which  he  called  the  city  of  David,  enriching  it 
with  additional  fortifications  and  new  buildings.  He  also  in- 
tended to  build  there  a  palace  for  himself,  for  which  Hiram  the 
king  of  Tyre,  sent  him  both  the  materials  and  the  mechanics. 
The  two  maritime  powers,  Tyre  and  Phelistia  were  natural 
rivals ;  a  good  understanding  with  either  made  one  the  enemy 
of  the  other.  Saul  was  an  enemy  of  the  Phelistines,  conse- 
quently, he  was  befriended  by  the  Tyrian  government.  David  was 
befriended  by  the  Phelistines;  wherefore,  he  found  in  Hiram  a 
natural  opponent,  who  most  likely  supported  the  house  of  Saul. 
The  Phelistines — Achash  probably  was  no  more — alarmed  by 
David's  sudden  attack  on  the  Jebusite  city,  and,  anticipating 
the  loss  of  their  highway  to  the  interior  of  Asia,  committed  the 


CHAPTER    VIII.  333 

first  breach  of  the  peace,  which  resulted  in  a  total  loss  of  their 
highway  through  Palestine.  This  rendered  Hiram  a  friend  of 
David,  which  he  let  the  latter  know  by  his  ambassadors  and 
gifts.  David  seeing  on  a  sudden  a  powerful  supporter  of  Saul 
turned  to  be  his  friend,  took  it  to  be  no  mean  omen  of  a  happy 
reign. 

The  intention  of  David  was  to  build  also  a  temple  of  the 
Lord  in  the  city  of  David,  for  which  he  had  the  advice  of  as 
high  an  authority  as  the  prophet  Nathan ;  but  either  on  account 
of  the  low  state  of  the  treasury — numerous  treasures  were  col- 
lected before  Solomon  could  begin  the  work — or  on  account  of 
disinclination  to  act  contrary  to  public  opinion,  the  ark  of  the 
Lord  having  always  rested  in  a  pavilion  composed  of  curtains, 
he  could  not  obtain  the  consent  of  the  national  council  to  this 
undertaking ;  but  he  was  advised  to  make  his  capital  also  the 
religious  metropolis,  according  to  the  Mosaic  policy,  by  bring- 
ing the  ark  of  the  Lord  to  the  city  of  David,.  The  grandeur 
of  the  Mosaic  tabernacle  was  most  likely  impaired  by  the 
gnawing  tooth  of  time,  and  so  David  erected  a  new  pavilion, 
undoubtedly  on  the  pattern  of  the  Mosaic  tabernacle,  in  the 
city  of  David,  and  made  preparations  to  move  the  ark  from 
Kiriath  Jearim  to  the  city  of  David.  At  the  head  of  thirty 
thousand  people,  who  had  assembled  to  take  part  in  the  solemn 
festivity,  and  accompanied  by  choruses  of  singers  and  musi- 
cians, David  proceeded  to  Kiriath  Jearim.  The  ark  was 
taken  from  the  house  of  Abinadab  on  the  hill,  and  laid  upon  a 
new  wagon  drawn  by  bullocks,  and  the  procession  moved  to- 
wards Jerusalem.  But  the  apprehensions  of  Samuel,  as  noticed 
before,  were  foimd  correct;  a  revolt  broke  out,  which,  when 
the  people  arrived  at  a  place  called  the  Threshing-floor  of 
Nachon,  had  reached  such  a  degree  of  violence,  and  had  caused 
such  a  general  confusion,  that  the  ark  was  jolted  on  its  wagon 
by  the  oxen  which  drew  it.  Uzzah,  son  of  Abinadab,  either 
intending  to  prevent  its  fall,  or  to  stop  its  progress,  laid  his 
hand  on  the  ark,  which  was  the  cause  of  his  instant  death; 
wherefore  the  place  was  called,  Perets  Uzzah,  Breach  of 
Uzzah.     David,  saw  himself  obliged  to  give  up  his  project  for 


334  PERIOD  III. 

the  present,  not  wishing  to  create  ill  feelings  by  any  kind  of 
disturbance.  The  ark  was  deposited  in  the  next  house,  which 
happened  to  belong  to  Obed-Edom,  a  man  of  Gath,  and  David 
with  his  suit  returned  to  Jerusalem.  It  certainly  did  not  meet 
with  the  approbation  of  the  pious,  that  the  ark  of  the  Lord  was 
deposited  in  the  house  of  a  Phelistine,  and  thus  David  had  a 
good  pretext  to  move  the  ark  finally  to  Jerusalem.  In  order  to 
give  full  satisfaction  to  the  law  and  ancient  custom,  David 
ordered  the  Levites  to  attend  the  ceremony,  who  came  in  num- 
ber about  nine  hundred.  The  king,  with  his  attendants,  the 
high  priest  and  proxy,  the  senate,  the  Levites,  with  their 
choruses  of  singers  and  musicians,  went  to  the  house  of  Obed- 
Edom.  The  ark  was  brought  in  solemn  procession  to  Jerusa- 
lem, and  was  deposited  in  the  new  pavilion,  with  music  and 
song,  sacrifices  and  hymns,  festivities  and  rejoicing,  to  the 
final  satisfaction  of  all  Israel.  On  this  occasion  were  composed, 
Psalms  xxiv  and  xxix,  and,  according  to  the  author  of  Chronicles, 
also  part  of  Psalm  cv,  and  most  likely  some  other  poems.  All 
but  Michal  were  pleased  with  the  transactions  of  the  day. 
She  censured  her  royal  consort  for  not  observing  a  deportment 
becoming  the  king  of  Israel,  which  was  ill  received  by  the 
king,  so  that  he  answered  her  in  an  offended  tone,  and,  as  it 
appears,  the  quarrel  ended  in  a  total  separation  of  Michal  from 
the  royal  bed. 

David  neglected  no  chance  which  served  to  reconcile  the 
friends  of  Saul  to  him.  He  craved  information  in  regard  to 
the  descendants  of  his  friend  Jonathan ;  and  he  learned  that  one 
son  of  Jonathan,  Mephibosheth,  or  Meribbaal,  survived  his 
father.  The  lame  prince  was  hidden  in  the  house  of  Machir, 
son  of  Amiel,  at  Lo-Debar,  beyond  Jordan.  David  immediately 
sent  for  the  prince,  gave  him  all  the  property  of  his  grandfather, 
although  he  also  had  a  claim  to  a  part  of  it,  and  granted  to 
him  the  privilege  to  eat  at  the  king's  table,  which  was  a  par- 
ticular distinction  at  that  time.  Ziba,  a  servant  of  Saul,  was 
made  steward  of  the  prince's  property.  This  disinterestedness 
and  friendly  remembrance  of  his  friend  Jonathan,  certainly  gave 
pleasure  to  the  friends  of  Saul. 


CHAPTER   VIII.  335 

Our  historian  also  informs  us,  that  David,  as  king  of  all 
Israel,  was  a  just  and  righteous  man,  carefully  and  conscien- 
tiously administrating  the  laws  of  his  country.  He  was  assisted 
in  the  discharge  of  his  duties  by  the  following  officers.  His 
cousin,  Joab,  was  chief  captain  of  the  host.  Jehoshaphat,  son 
of  Ahilud,  was  auditor,  whose  office  it  was  to  hear  and  to 
record  the  causes  brought  before  the  king,  requiring  his  deci- 
sion, interference,  aid,  and  so  forth.  Zadok  and  Abiathar 
were  high  priest  and  proxy;  Sheraiah  was  chief  secretary. 
Adoram  was  collector  of  the  taxes.  Hushai,  the  Archite,  was 
the  king's  companion;  an  office  found  also  at  the  Persian  court. 
Ahitophel,  the  Gilonite,  and  Jonathan,  the  king's  uncle,  were 
his  privy  counsellors.  Benaiahu,  son  of  Jehoiada,  the  chiefs 
of  the  two  southern  nations  annexed  to  Jehudah,  Cherethi  and 
Pelethi.  Eira,  the  Jairite,  and  the  sons  of  David,  composed 
the  personal  attendants  of  David.  In  all  probability,  the  pro- 
phets Nathan  and  Gad  were  commissioned  with  the  presidency 
of  the  senate.  Twelve  officers  were  appointed  to  take  care  of 
the  king's  estates  and  herds,  which  undoubtedly  were  con- 
siderable. He  possessed  Ziklag  and  vicinity  (I  Samuel  xxvii, 
6),  and  Sharon,  which  must  have  been  a  fine  tract  of  land, 
according  to  the  poems  written  on  it;  besides  this,  he  had  a 
large  estate  with  his  wife  Abigail  (I  Samuel  xxv,  2),  and  had 
become  rich  in  herds  by  his  warfares  in  the  south  of  Jehudah. 
There  is  also  mentioned  an  officer,  Jehial,  the  Hachmonite, 
who  superintended  the  education  of  the  royal  princes.  These 
appointments  of  David  permit  us  to  throw  a  glance  at  the 
fabric  of  government  then  existing,  which  our  historian  by  no 
means  ascribed  to  the  ingenuity  of  David;  the  offices  existed, 
but  the  officers  were  appointed  anew.  Zadok  seems  to  have 
been  high  priest  in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Saul,  where- 
fore he  maintained  his  dignity  notwithstanding  the  obligations 
of  David  to  Abiathar.  The  government  was  well  organized, 
the  branches  of  public  business  were  properly  divided;  the 
king  was  surrounded  by  counsellors  and  a  splendid  suit,  without 
betraying  any  traces  of  oriental  pomp,  stupid  titles,  and  super- 


336  PERIOD    III. 

fluous  luxury.  The  eighteen  wives  of  David  are  the  only  traces 
of  oriental  luxury  which  we  meet  at  his  court. 

The  misfortunes  of  Saul  in  his  campaigns  against  the  Phe- 
listines,  had  taught  David  the  important  lesson  that  a  more 
practical  military  organization  had  become  necessary;  the  three 
thousand  men  of  Saul's  army  were  found  insufficient  to  protect 
the  country  against  sudden  attacks  from  abroad,  while  a  large 
standing  army  was  both  dangerous  to  the  king  in  cases  of 
military  revolt,  and  to  the  liberties  of  the  people,  threatening 
a  military  despotism,  and  being  injurious  to  the  industry,  and 
especially  to  the  agricultural  interests  of  the  state.  All  these 
disadvantages  were  overcome  by  the  following  organization; 
twenty-four  thousand  men  were  to  be  in  active  service  for  one 
month  annually,  after  which  they  were  replaced  by  other 
twenty-four  thousand  men;  so  that  an  army  of  12  x  24,000 
was  trained  and  accustomed  to  bear  arms.  An  army  of  two  hun- 
dred and  eighty-eight  thousand  trained  troops,  under  the  com- 
mand of  David  and  Joab  was  formidable;  and  this  fact  alone 
can  account  for  the  conquests  of  David. 

The  Levites  also  required  a  new  organization;  their  numbers 
had  increased,  they  were  scattered  over  the  whole  country,  and 
no  order  had  been  established  amongst  them.  David  divided 
the  priests  into  twenty-four  divisions,  each  of  which  had  the 
divine  service  two  weeks,  annually,  under  their  own  family 
chief  assisting  the  high  priest  or  his  proxy.  Shemaiah,  son  of 
Nethaniel,  the  Levite,  is  mentioned  as  the  king's  scribe  in 
sacerdotal  affairs.  The  Levites  were  divided  into  judges  and 
officers,  denned  before,  guardians,  musicians,  singers,  and  as- 
sistants of  the  priests.  The  judges  and  officers  numbered  six 
thousand,  there  were  four  thousand  guardians,  four  thousand 
musicians,  and  twenty-four  thousand  assistant  priests.  The 
latter  were  divided  into  twenty-four  divisions,  each  of  which 
served  two  weeks  annually,  so  that  nine  hundred  Levites  were 
always  present  in  Jerusalem,  besides  one  division  of  priests. 
The  sacred  place,  which  included  the  different  courts  of  jus- 
tice, the  meeting  rooms  for  the  national  council,  the  public 


CHAPTER    VIII. 


337 


treasury,  and  the  office  of  the  high  priest,  was  manned  by 
about  one  thousand  Levites  and  priests,  who  in  the  mean  time 
were  priests  and  guardians  both  of  the  law  and  its  executors. 
The  Levites,  as  had  been  stated  before,  were  the  national  guard, 
the  literati  and  the  guardians  of  the  law ;  to  this  Moses  appointed 
them.  David  but  reorganized  them,  to  secure  proper  order. 
The  most  prominent  of  them  in  musical  attainments  were 
Asaph,  Heman,  and  Jeduthun;  the  sons  of  all  of  them  and  the 
three  daughters  of  Heman,  are  mentioned  as  artists  in  music 
and  song,  and  as  having  assisted  divine  worship  in  the  taber- 
nacle. The  poetical  compositions  of  the  three  forementioned 
men,  and  those  inaccurately  ascribed  to  them,  are  too  numer- 
ous to  be  quoted. 

The  military  organization  was  well  calculated  to  protect  the 
country  against  foreign  invasions,  and  to  train  a  large  army 
without  its  being  a  cause  of  fear,  and  without  injuring  industry, 
while  the  organization  of  the  Levites  was  calculated  to  secure 
domestic  tranquility  and  the  administration  of  the  law  by  the 
very  means  of  the  Mosaic  law.  The  sojourning  of  each  Levite 
and  priest  in  Jerusalem  for  two  weeks  annually  was  new,  and 
well  calculated  to  prevent  jealousy  and  to  improve  their  literary 
condition.  Both  organizations  were  wisely  constructed  to 
prevent  conspiracies  at  the  capital.  How  long  it  took  David 
to  complete  this  internal  organization,  and  how  long  he  main- 
tained peace  with  the  surrounding  nations  can  not  be  said,  it 
certainly  required  a  considerable  time  to  complete  the  work. 

The  war  with  the  Phelistines,  of  which  but  a  brief  state- 
ment has  reached  us,*  took  place,  it  would  seem,  previously 
to  all  the  other  warfares  of  David .  The  following  causes  led 
us  to  this  opinion. 

1.  In  the  synopsis  of  the  Davidian  warsj  mention  is  made 
first  of  all  of  a  war  with  the  Phelistines,  which  ends  in  the 
capture  of  Metheg  ha- Amah,  according  to  the  author  of  Samuel, 
which  is  Gath  and  its  districts  according  to  the  author  of 
Chronicles. 

*  II  Samuel  xxi,  15-22;  II  Chronicles  xx,  4-8. 
t  II  Samuel  vinyl  Chronicles  xviii. 
22 


338  PERIOD    III. 

2.  In  the  last  campaign  the  Phelistines  were  left  at  Gezer  of 
Ephraim  (II  Samuel  v,  25).  This  is  also  the  point  where  the 
second  campaign  was  commenced  (II  Chronicles  xx,  4).  We 
can  not  imagine  for  a  moment,  that  David  made  conquests  in 
foreign  countries,  while  the  strong  Gezer  was  left  in  the  hands 
of  a  foreign  power. 

3.  It  is  also  mentioned  there,  that  the  Phelistines  held  Nob, 
which,  according  to  what  has  been  said  before  was  near  Gibeon. 
It  would  be  very  uncritical  to  suppose  that  the  Phelistines  took 
Nob  after  David  had  taken  Damascus,  Petra  and  the  two 
Rabbah. 

It  therefore  appears  tons,  that  while  David  was  engaged  with 
internal  improvements,  as  noticed  before,  the  Phelistines  at- 
tempted to  regain  their  highway  through  Palestine,  which 
occasioned  David  to  wage  that  war. 

The  first  attack  in  the  present  campaign  was  made  upon  the 
Phelistines  in  Gezer.     The  engagement  was  so  hot  and  despe- 
rate,  that  David,  fatigued  by  a  long  conflict,  was  unable  to 
defend  himself  against  the  violent  attacks  of  a  gigantic  Phelis- 
tine,  who  is  said  to  have  been  the  brother  of  the  celebrated 
Goliath.    David  would  have  become  the  victim  of  an  enraged 
enemy,  had  not  his  brave  cousin,  Abishai,  brother  of  Joab, 
come  at  the  right  time  to  his  assistance,  who  killed  the  Phelis- 
tine    giant    and   saved   David.      Gezer   was    taken,    and   the 
Phelistines  were  driven  back.     The  men  of  David  had  sworn 
he  should  not  accompany  them  in  the  war,  and  so  Joab  led  the 
army  against  the  enemy.     Nob,  we  have  said  before,  was  near 
Gibeon,  near  the  boundary  of  Dan  and  Benjamin,  on  the  same 
range  of  mountains  with  Gezer;  there  the  Phelistines  found  a 
new  point  to  organize,  and  there  probably  they  received  rein- 
forcements.    Two  desperate  battles  were  fought  at  that  place, 
at  each  of  which  fell  another  giant  brother  of  Goliath.     The 
Phelistines  were  finally  defeated  and  driven  from  their  position 
back  to  their  own  country,  to  the  city  of  Gath,  the  residence 
of  their  kings.     The  guerilla  campaigns  of  the  Phelistines  dis- 
turbing Israel  during  all  the  reign  of  Saul,  sufficiently  cautioned 
David  not  to  rest   satisfied  with  having  driven  the  Phelistines 


CHAPTER    VIII.  339 

from  the  Israelitish  territories ;  it  became  his  duty  to  render 
them  incapable  of  injuring  his  country.  The  army  was  ordered 
to  invade  Phelistia.  They  took  the  fortified  Gath  and  its 
adjacent  territory,  from  which  place  it  was  easy  to  hold  in 
check  the  weakened  Phelistines.  The  people  of  Gath  seem  to 
have  remained  faithful  friends  of  David  ever  afterwards,  so 
that  even  six  hundred  of  them  followed  David  when  he  fled 
from  Jerusalem  before  his  son  Absalom  (II  Samuel  xv,  18). 

David's  army  must  have  conquered  the  whole  of  Phelistia; 
for  we  find  that  during  the  whole  of  the  reign  of  Solomon  the 
Israelitish  territory  extended  to  the  river  of  Egypt  beyond 
Gaza,  still  no  mention  is  made  of  another  campaign  against 
the  Phelistines.  The  sacred  historian  mentions  only  the  cap- 
ture of  Gath,  because  that  was  then  the  capital,  the  residence 
of  the  king  of  all  Phelistia.  The  term  DjTjm  "  He  caused 
them  to  submit"  (II  Samuel  v,  1)  confirms  our  view. 

Ammon  and  Moab  were  but  one  nation;  the  children  of  Lot, 
divided  into  the  two  tribes  of  Ammon  and  Moab,  were 
governed  by  kings  of  either  tribe,  according  to  which  the 
nation  was  then  called  either  Ammon  or  Moab.  Moses  always 
considered  them  as  one  nation  (Deutr.  xxiii,  4).  The  first  in- 
vasion of  Moab  under  their  king  Eglon  was  effected  in  company 
with  Ammon  (Judges  iii,  12,  13).  When  Ammon  invaded  Israel, 
for  which  a  seizure  of  territory  in  the  days  of  Moses  was  men- 
tioned as  the  pretext,  the  messengers  of  Jephthah  were  told,  it 
was  the  territory  of  Moab  and  not  of  Ammon  about  which  war 
was  waged  (Judges  xi,  13-18).  It  was  impossible,  therefore, 
for  David  to  wage  war  against  Moab  (I  Samuel  viii,  2)  and 
maintain  friendly  relations  with  Ammon  (ibid  x,  2).  David 
sent  messengers  to  Hanon,  son  of  Nahash,  who  is  mentioned  as 
the  king  of  Ammon  (I  Samuel  xi),  to  condole  with  him  on  the 
death  of  his  father,  who  is  said  to  have  done  favors  to  David. 
Still  our  historian  did  not  mention  any  such  favor,  notwith- 
standing the  pains  he  took  in  giving  us  all  the  particulars  in 
the  early  history  of  David.  There  is  no  fact  mentioned  which 
could  be  made  a  pretext  for  an  invasion  of  Moab,  while  every 
other  foreign  war  of  David  was  based  upon  some  aggression  on 


340  PERIOD    III. 

the  side  of  the  enemy.  The  truth  must  be  this:  David  when 
persecuted  by  Saul,  brought  his  parents  and  their  families  into 
a  city  of  Moab  under  the  protection  of  Nahosh,  the  enemy  of 
Saul,  who  probably  then  resided  in  Moab,  the  country  having 
two  capitals  of  the  same  name,  Rabbah  of  Ammon,  Philadel- 
phia and  Rabbah  of  Moab,  Areopolis.  When,  therefore,  Nahash 
died,  David  sent  ambassadors  to  his  son  Hanon,  to  condole 
with  him  on  the  death  of  his  father.  But  the  officers  of  the 
king  of  Ammon  and  Moab,  convinced  by  the  Phelistine  cam- 
paign that  the  private  relations  of  David  had  no  influeuce  upon 
him  in  the  discharge  of  his  royal  duties,  persuaded  their  ruler, 
that  it  was  not  the  sentiments  of  gratitude  and  friendship 
prompting  David  to  this  act  of  courtesy;  that  it  was  his  inten- 
tion to  invade  the  country,  and  that  his  ambassadors  were  but 
spies  sent  under  the  mask  of  friendship.  Nahash  was  foolish 
enough  to  believe  his  counsellors ;  he  insulted  the  ambassadors 
of  David  in  a  manner  then  held  to  be  outrageous.  Their 
beards  were  cut  and  their  cloaks  were  mutilated.  If  David 
had  previously  beaten  Moab  and  the  Syrians,  Nahash  would 
have  carefully  avoided  insulting  David  so  imprudently.  The 
ambassadors  returned  to  Jericho,  being  ashamed  to  come  to 
Jerusalem,  and  word  was  sent  to  David  of  what  had  occurred. 
The  Israelites  had  certainly  not  forgotten  the  unjust  attacks  of 
Ammon  and  Moab  upon  their  territory  in  the  times  of  Ehud, 
of  Jephthah,  and  of  Saul.  The  disgraceful  demand  of  Nahash, 
which  he  made  to  the  besieged  people  of  Jabash  in  Gilead, 
must  have  been  especially  fresh  in  their  memory.  This  pro- 
voking act  of  Hanon  was  but  a  kindling  spark  thrown  in  the 
midst  of  accumulated  combustibles ;  the  Israelites  were  enraged ; 
brave,  warlike,  and  accustomed  to  victory  as  they  now  were, 
David  could  not  stop  the  popular  current,  had  he  attempted  to 
do  so,  and  was  obliged  to  invade  Moab.  The  first  campaign  took 
place  in  the  province  of  Moab ;  and  it  appears  to  have  been  an 
easy  work  for  the  Davidian  army  to  occupy  the  Moabitish 
territory;  although  the  Moabites  so  bravely  defended  their 
country,  that  two-thirds  of  the^-  army  covered  the  battle  fields; 
still  the  conquest  was   completed,  and  Moab  was  made  tribu- 


CHAPTER     VIII.  S41 

tary  to  David.  The  conquest  of  Amnion  could  not  be  under- 
taken immediately,  for  David  saw  himself  threatened  with 
war  from  two  sources  at  the  same  time. 

Edom  was  alarmed  by  the  conquest  of  Moab  and  made  pre- 
parations to  invade  Moab  in  favor  of  Amnion.  The  Edomites 
marched  towards  the  Dead  sea,  and  encamped  in  the  Salt  val- 
ley, most  likely  in  the  Salt  marsh,  south  of  the  Dead  sea, 
where  they  were  protected  on  all  sides  against  sudden  attacks, 
and  from  which  point  they  were  enabled  to  operate  against 
Moab  and  Jehudah.  The  position  of  the  Edomites  was  the 
more  dangerous  to  the  Da  vidian  army,  as  it  cut  off  their  re- 
treat into  Jehudah.  Abishai,  mentioned  before  as  the  savior 
of  David,  was  left  in  charge  of  the  southern  army,  and,  as  it 
appears,  in  a  critical  condition;  for  attention  was  attracted 
towards  the  north,  where  a  more  powerful  enemy  threatened 
to  invade  and  to  subjugate  the  country,  as  he  had  done  with 
Damascus.  Hadarezer,  son  of  Rehob,  king  of  Zobah,  had 
risen  to  great  eminence  in  Syria  and  Northern  Mesopotamia. 
Whether  Nisibis  or  Aleppo  was  then  the  headquarters  of  the 
Syrians  is  of  no  importance  to  us ;  it  is  sufficient  for  us  to 
know,  that  Hadarezer  the  Zobaite,  had  marched  a  victorious 
army  as  far  west  as  Damascus,  conquering  cities  and  armies, 
which  were  calculated  to  stop  the  progress  of  the  victorious 
army,  chiefly  composed  of  cavalry,  and  so  he  succeeded  in 
holding  in  subjection  a  large  part  of  Syria  and  Mesopotamia, 
including  Damascus  and  Aleppo.  Thoi,  also,  king  of  Hamath 
or  Emesa,  north-east  of  Palestine,  was  involved  in  war  with 
Hadarezer.  After  Hadarezer  had  garrisoned  Damascus,  he  in- 
tended to  conquer  Palestine  before  returning  to  the  Euphrates, 
and  marched  at  the  head  of  a  considerable  army  towards  Pales- 
tine to  effect  his  purpose.  David  most  likely  met  him  in  the  moun- 
tainous region  at  the  head  waters  of  the  Jordan,  where  Hada- 
rezer could  not  use  the  cavalry  to  any  advantage,  and  the 
Davidian  infantry,  the  slingers  and  archers  so  useful  in  such 
territories,  were  certainly  superior  to  those  of  Hadarezer.  He 
had  committed  the  imprudence  of  exposing  an  army,  trained 
and  accustomed  to  fight  in  plains,   to  the  attacks  of  brave  and 


342  PERIOD  III. 

practiced  mountaineers  in  a  mountainous  territory,  every  hill 
of  which  was  known  to  David  and  certainly  occupied  to  the 
best  advantage,  while  it  was  foreign  to  Hadarezer.  The  con- 
sequence was  a  signal  defeat  of  the  victorious  army  of  the 
Syrians,  with  a  loss  of  seventeen  hundred  horse  and  twenty 
thousand  foot.  This  loss  by  no  means  discouraged  Hadarezer; 
he  renewed  the  attack  after  having  been  reinforced  by  fresh 
troops  from  Damascus ;  but  was  again  defeated  with  a  loss  of 
twenty-two  thousand  men.  David  pursued  his  advantages, 
marched  on  Damascus,  which  he  found  evaluated  by  the  enemy, 
and  garrisoned  it  and  the  dependent  towns.  He  did  the  same 
with  Betah,  or  Heliopolis,  and  Berothi,  or  Bostra,  so  that  in  the 
north  he  came  in  immediate  contact  with  Thoi,  king  of  Ha- 
math,  or  Emesa,  who  made  considerable  presents  to  David, 
having  sent  to  him  his  own  son  Joram,  as  an  indemnity 
for  a  part  of  the  expenses  incurred  in  the  campaign  against 
Hadarezer  who  was  now  driven  from  this  part  of  the  country. 
David  had  in  the  north  a  friendly  ally.  In  the  south  this 
conquest  brought  him  to  the  northern  frontiers  of  Amnion, 
which  was  now  exposed  on  three  sides  to  the  Davidian  armies. 
The  position  of  the  southern  army  under  the  command 
of  Abishai  was,  as  we  remarked  before,  in  a  critical  state. 
Still  he  succeeded  in  maintaining  himself  in  Moab.  The 
prayers  of  David  during  his  engagement  in  the  north  (Psalms 
lx  and  lxx,  and  others),  and  his  song  of  victory  after  the  battle 
which  we  shall  next  describe  (Psalms  lx  and  cviii),  fully  indi- 
cate the  dangerous  state  in  which  David  considered  the  coun- 
try during  this  double  war.  When,  therefore,  Hadarezer  was 
defeated,  and  while  David  still  operated  in  Syria,  Joab  was  dis- 
patched with  an  aggregate  force  to  join  the  southern  army. 
Joab  most  likely  marched  through  Jehudah,  and  attacked  the 
Edomites  in  their  encampments  in  the  Salt  marsh,  in  which 
battle  he  defeated  the  Edomites,  who  left  twelve  thousand  men 
on  the  battle  ground.  While  David  was  occupied  in  the  north, 
as  described  before,  Joab  completed  the  conquest  of  Edom  (I. 
Kings  xi,  15),  while  Abishai  prevented  the  Ammonites  from 
j  oining  with  the  Edomites.     David  returned  to  Jerusalem  with 


CHAPTER     VIII.  343 

rich  spoils  in  gold,  silver  and  copper,  which  he  deposited  in  the 
national  treasury.  Joab  and  Abishai,  however,  were  ordered  to 
continue  the  war  against  Amnion,  who  had  engaged  a  Syrian 
army  of  twenty- two  thousand  strong.  Joab  and  Abishai  con- 
centrated their  forces  to  attack  the  enemy ;  but  they  were  out- 
manouvered  by  Hanon,  so  that  the  Israelites  came  between 
two  armies ;  the  Ammonites  came  upon  them  from  the  city,  Rab- 
bath  Ammon,  while  the  Syrians  at  the  same  time  arrived, 
threatening  to  attack  their  rear.  Joab  when  aware  of  the 
imminent  danger,  choose  from  the  army  the  veteran  troops  to 
attack  the  Syrians,  leaving  the  rest  under  the  command  of 
Abishai  to  attack  the  Ammonites,  maintaining  a  communica- 
tion between  the  two  divisions,  in  order  to  be  able  to  render 
assistance  to  each  other  if  possible  and  necessary.  The  short 
address  of  Joab  is  no  mean  testimony  of  his  soldier-like  cha- 
racter: "  Be  of  good  courage,  and  let  us  be  strong  on  behalf  of 
our  people  and  the  cities  of  our  God,  and  the  Lord  do  that 
which  seemeth  him  good."  Joab  begun  the  attack  upon  the 
Syrians,  and  put  them  to  flight,  which  so  discouraged  the  Am- 
monites that  they  too  hastened  back  to  the  city,  which  afforded 
them  ample  protection  for  a  long  time. 

When  Hadarezer  had  received  information  of  the  defeat  of 
the  Syrians,  he  sent  a  strong  force,  chiefly  consisting  of  caval- 
ry and  chariots,  under  the  command  of  Shobach,  his  chief 
captain,  to  repel  Joab  from  the  Ammonitish  territory.  The 
Syrian  army  encamped  at  Helam.  David,  informed  of  the 
approach  of  the  Syrians,  collected  his  army  and  crossed  the 
Jordan  to  meet  the  enemy.  We  are  not  informed  about  the 
particulars  of  the  battle,  which  must  have  been  a  desperate 
one,  for  the  Syrians  were  defeated  with  a  loss  of  seven  hundred 
chariots  and  forty  thousand  horse ;  the  Syrian  commander  lost 
his  life  on  the  battle  field,  which  undoubtedly  gave  rise  to  the 
twentieth  Psalm.  We  are  not  informed,  that  at  this  time  David 
observed  the  Mosaic  command,  to  lame  their  horses  and  to 
burn  their  chariots,  as  he  had  done  in  the  first  campaign. 
David  had  now  learned  to  value  the  advantages  of  a  good 
cavalry  on  plains,  and  he  was  now  master  of  Syria  as  far  as 


344  PERIOD    III. 

the  Euphrates,  and  so  he  could  not  well  do  without  a  cavalry, 
which  was  not  necessary  to  defend  Palestine. 

Eabbah  held  out,  although  Hadarezer  had  sued  for  peace, 
and  became  tributary  to  Israel.  David  returned  to  Jerusalem, 
and  Joab  was  left  at  the  head  of  a  force  to  reduce  Kabbah, 
after  the  rest  of  the  country  had  been  occupied.  Many  assaults 
of  Joab  upon  the  city  were  effectually  repelled,  in  one  of  which 
Uriah  fell,  according  to  the  will  of  the  king,  as  we  shall  see 
hereafter.  Joab  finally  succeeded  in  taking  that  part  of  the  city 
where  was  the  royal  palace,  and  the  reservoir,  which  supplied 
the  city  with  water.  The  city  could  hold  out  no  longer,  and 
so  Joab  sent  to  David  to  come  and  complete  the  work,  else  he 
would  take  the  city  and  call  it  by  his  name.  David  came 
with  an  additional  force,  and  took  the  city.  He  appropriated 
to  himself  the  precious  crown  of  Amnion,  besides  large  spoils 
which  he  took  in  Rabbah  and  other  cities.  The  heroic  defenders 
of  their  country  were  transported  from  their  homes,  and  made 
to  labor  with  the  heaviest  iron  tools. 

David  and  his  army  returned  to  Jerusalem;  he  was  now 
master  of  all  the  territory  between  the  Mediterranean  and  the 
Euphrates,  a  few  small  districts  excepted,  as  Moses  had  set 
down  the  landmarks  of  Israel.  It  was  not  taken  in  wars  of 
conquest;  David  was  provoked,  was  affronted,  and  he  only 
defended  the  honor  of  the  nation ;  the  results  were  by  no  means 
premeditated.  The  war  could  have  been  extended  over  the  rest 
of  Syria,  farther  north  and  east;  but  neither  the  policy  of 
David  nor  of  Israel  was  a  hostile  one ;  precisely  as  Moses  had 
founded  it,  so  it  still  was. 

What  plan  of  government  David  now  pursued  is  difficult 
to  say;  there  was  now  a  new  state  of  things  in  existence. 
Israelitish  garrisons  were  at  Damascus,  and  other  Syrian  cities, 
as  well  as  Idumea.  Gath,  as  well  as  Ammon  and  Moab,  could 
not  well  be  held  without  a  garrison,  and  there  can  be  no  doubt, 
that  a  new  plan  had  to  be  adopted  in  this  respect;  but  no  inform- 
ation on  this  point  has  reached  us.  We  occasionally  learn,  that 
foreigners  served  in  the  army,  that  Cherethites,  Peletites  and 
Gathites   were   in  Jerusalem,  when   the  Absalom  revolution 


CHAPTER    VIII.  345 

broke  out;  still,  we  are  entirely  ignorant  of  the  manner  of 
keeping  up  a  standing  army  and  governing  conquered  pro- 
vinces. It  is  most  likely,  that  the  soldiers  stationed  in  foreign 
countries  were  volunteers  of  different  nations ;  that  aside  of 
the  twenty-four  thousand  Israelites,  which  were  always  on 
duty  in  the  inland  places,  and  especially  at  Jerusalem,  there 
were  also  enlisted  a  corresponding  number  of  the  depending 
nations  to  do  service  on  the  same  plan  as  the  Israelites.  How 
were  the  annexed  countries  governed?  The  piety  of  David 
and  his  aversion  to  idolatry,  would  suggest  that  they  were 
governed  by  the  Mosaic  laws ;  but  there  are  no  historical  ves- 
tiges in  proof  of  this  suggestion,  as  in  fact  we  have  no  historical 
ground  to  decide  for  or  against.  Still,  the  customs  of  ancient 
nations  would  speak  in  favor  of  this  decision :  the  gods  of  the 
victorious  nation  were  always  considered  superior  to  those  of 
the  conquered,  the  gods  and  the  laws  of  the  respective  gods 
were  identical  with  all  eastern  nations.  How  long  a  time  was 
spent  in  those  campaigns?  This  is  another  important  question 
which  can  not  be  answered,  since  the  time  of  their  beginning 
can  not  be  ascertained.  The  end  of  the  war  was  almost 
simultaneous  with  the  birth  of  Solomon  (II  Samuel  xii,  25). 
That  Solomon  was  still  young  when  David  died  is  frequently 
remarked  in  Chronicles ;  but  that  he  was  not  so  very  young  as 
is  generally  supposed,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  he  reigned 
but  about  forty  years,  still,  it  is  said  of  him,  that  he  was  led 
astray  when  he  had  become  old  (I  Kings  xi,  4).  It  will,  there- 
fore, be  safe  to  say,  the  Davidian  campaigns  ended  about  twenty 
years  before  the  demise  of  that  king. 

It  is  extremely  difficult  to  govern  a  nation  with  such  a  demo- 
cratic spirit,  laws  and  institutions  as  the  Israelites  had,  after 
the  people  had  become  conscious  of  their  immense  power  by  a 
long  and  chivalric  warfare,  proud  of  their  position  among 
other  nations,  made  rich  by  a  fertile  soil,  and  the  spoils  of  their 
enemies,  intelligent  by  the  labors  of  a  large  number  of  national 
literati,  and  united  by  the  ties  of  a  common  language,  religion 
and  nationality.  As  soon,  therefore,  as  war  was  waged  no  more, 
dissatisfaction  became  visible  against  the  government  of  David, 


346  PERIOD    III. 

of  which  Psalms  xvii,  xxv,  xxvi,  xxvii,  xxviii,  xxxi,  xxxv, 
xxxviii,  xl,  xli,  and  other  Psalms  too  plainly  speak  to  require 
another  demonstration  at  our  hands.  David  himself,  as  heroic, 
prudent  and  pious  as  he  was,  gave  considerable  reason  for 
dissatisfaction;  although  the  dissatisfaction  of  Jehudah,  most 
likely,  must  be  ascribed  to  their  claims  of  supremacy  which 
David  did  not  much  favor.  David  considerably  lessened  his 
glory  by  his  endeavors  to  secure  to  his  family  the  hereditary 
and  exclusive  claim  to  the  throne  of  Israel.  It  is  no  wonder 
that  he  effected  his  design,  being  the  favorite  of  the  prophets 
and  of  the  Levites,  having  in  his  favor  the  immense  services 
rendered  to  the  nation,  the  military  glory  which  covered  his 
head,  the  literary  and  political  talents  which  made  him  the 
favorite  of  the  multitude,  his  pious  and  punctual  adherence  to 
the  law  and  religion  of  the  nation,  which  obtained  in  his  favor 
also  a  majority  of  the  national  council.  And,  in  fact,  it  can 
not  be  said,  that  the  favor  was  unmerited.  Still,  the  events  of 
the  future  history  will  show,  that  this  was  not  the  will  of  the 
nation.  That  it  gave  rise  to  civil  war,  and,  finally,  to  the  divi- 
sion of  Israel.  It  is  impossible  that  a  nation  trained  for  four 
centuries  in  a  republican  life,  should  at  once  give  up  for  ever 
its  right  to  govern  itself.  The  author  of  Samuel,  aware  of  the 
mischief  which  grew  out  of  this  bad  policy,  both  of  David  and 
the  national  council,  sets  the  document  relating  to  it  before  the 
Syrian  war,  although  there  was  then  no  cause  to  bestow  such 
a  peculiar  favor  on  David,  in  order  to  give  to  the  transaction 
the  appearance  of  neutrality  on  the  part  of  David ;  and  in  his 
general  style,  or  probably  in  the  style  of  those  who  compiled 
the  canon,  and  as  the  Israelites  generally  did  and  still  do,  when 
a  misfortune  befalls  them,  we  are  told  God  has  done  it,  conse- 
quently, we  must  submit  to  the  consequences. 

The  second  cause  of  dissatisfaction  given  by  David  was  his 
conduct  towards  Uriah  and  his  wife,  which  our  sources  com- 
municate in  the  following  manner.  While  Joab  and  Abishai 
besieged  Rabbath  Ammon,  after  peace  was  concluded  with 
Haderezer,  David  walking  on  the  roof  of  his  palace  saw  a 
woman  of  eminent  beauty,  who,  on  inquiry,  he  was  told  that 


CHAPTER    Villi  347 

she  was  the  wife  of  Uriah,  one  of  his  prominent  heroes  and 
friends.  He,  notwithstanding,  was  unable  to  bridle  his  pas- 
sions. The  woman  was  brought  to  the  royal  palace,  and  seduced 
by  the  king.  The  consequences  of  that  immoral  act  were  soon 
felt  by  the  faithless  woman,  Bath  Sheba,  and  the  king  was  in- 
formed of  it.  He  saw  himself  in  an  embarassing  condition, 
and  desirous  to  cover  his  sin  he  sent  for  Uriah,  who  was  in  the 
army  with  Joab,  hoping  that  he  would  stay  with  his  wife  for  a 
time,  and  so  the  affair  would  remain  a  secret.  This  part  of 
the  narrative  speaks  for  itself.  David,  intoxicated  by  success, 
and  surrounded  by  luxury,  yielded  to  the  demands  of  his  pas- 
sions ;  but,  fearing  the  censure  of  the  people  and  the  consequences 
of  an  act  which  the  law  punished  with  death,  he  endeavored  to 
conceal  his  crime.  Uriah  came  to  David,  apparently,  as  a 
bearer  of  dispatches  from  the  army.  The  expectations  of  the* 
king  were  not  realized ;  for  the  patriotic  Uriah  sternly  refused 
to  go  home  and  enjoy  the  pleasures  of  domestie  happiness,  as 
long  as  his  superiors  and  comrades  were  exposed  to  the  incon- 
veniences of  a  campaign.  He  was  intoxicated  at  the  royal 
table,  but  neither  did  this  produce  a  change  in  his  patriotic 
resolution.  The  king  was  disappointed  in  his  expectations. 
Uriah  left  Jerusalem  to  return,  probably,  as  an  accuser  of  the 
king  before  the  tribunals  of  justice.  David  had  the  alternative 
either  to  expose  himself  to  the  people,  or  to  remove  Uriah  from 
his  way.  He  dared  not  to  have  him  assassinated  or  con- 
demned by  a  legal  tribunal,  as  Jezebel  did  to  Naboth,  and  so 
he  wrote  a  letter  to  Joab,  ordering  him  to  cause  the  death  of 
Uriah  in  a  maimer  that  would  not  excite  suspicion,  which 
command  was  speedily  obeyed. 

When  the  king  was  informed  of  it  he  took  Bath  Sheba  in 
marriage,  thinking  that  the  whole  would  remain  a  profound 
secret.  Still  it  remained  no  secret;  Bath  Sheba  gave  birth  to 
a  child  much  before  the  usual  time.  The  king  did  not  abandon 
her,  but  his  attendants  suspected,  investigated,  and  the  hor- 
rible crime  was  soon  disclosed.  The  friends  of  legal  liberty 
trembled  for  the  consequences.  If  the  laws  of  the  land,  if  the 
life  of  one  of  his  most  devout  friends  and  patriotic  citizens 


348  PERIOD    III. 

were  sacrificed  in  such  a  criminal  way,  the  whole  nation  was 
in  danger.  David  had  hoped  to  cover  his  guilt,  but  the 
prophet  Nathan  corrected  his  mistake.  He  told  the  king, 
whether  by  his  own  impulse  or  by  secret  orders  of  the  senate, 
in  the  name  of  God,  who  abhors  impurity  and  crime,  that  he 
had  forfeited  the  confidence  of  his  friends,  that  the  sword 
would  not  depart  from  his  house,  which  indicated  that  revolu- 
tions would  break  out  in  consequence  of  the  stain  on  his 
character,  and  the  apprehensions  of  the  people.  David  con- 
fessed his  guilt,  he  acknowledged  that  he  had  disgraced  his 
dignity  and  violated  the  laws  of  the  land.  This  humble  con- 
fession was  a  sufficient  guaranty  to  the  prophet,  that  the  crime 
was  not  committed  in  defiance  of  the  law ;  that  it  was  but  a 
momentary  forgetfulness  of  his  duties,  and  consequently  that 
the  people  had  no  cause  for  farther  apprehensions.  This  was 
the  whole  object  of  the  prophet's  mission,  and  therefore  he 
promised  to  David  the  pardon  of  the  Lord,  or  the  farther 
support  of  the  senate  to  maintain  him  on  the  throne,  which 
was  after  all  very  prudent,  for  in  grateful  remembrance  of  the 
glory  and  prosperity  to  which  David  elevated  his  nation,  and 
in  consideration  of  his  eminent  abilities  to  govern  the  land, 
as  well  as  of  his  numerous  friends,  it  would  have  been 
wrong  and  imprudent  to  farther  expose  him  to  the  people,  or 
to  dethrone  him  on  account  of  a  private  crime,  which  he  con- 
fessed and  repented  of.  But  the  people  thought  differently 
from  those  high  in  office.  The  moral  feelings  of  the  multitude 
were  offended.  In  vain  did  the  king  fast  and  pray  for  seven 
days,  when  the  child  begotten  in  the  sin  was  taken  sick;  in 
vain  was  it  circulated  among  the  people  that  David's  trans- 
gression was  obliterated  before  the  Lord,  who  punished  him 
with  the  death  of  the  child;  in  vain  the  most  beautiful  poems, 
depicting  the  repentance  of  David  and  the  pardon  granted  by 
God  (Psalms  xxxii,  li,  lxix,  and  others),  were  circulated;  his 
enemies  had  found  a  cause  to  blame  him,  and  innocent  people 
know  of  no  prudence.  Their  moral  feelings  were  offended,  and 
all  the  virtues  and  greatness  of  David  were  forgotten.  The 
friends  of  the  house  of  Saul,   the  friends  of  the  republic,  the 


CHAPTER    VIII.  349 

enemies  of  David  for  other  causes,  and  gangs  of  idlers  in  which 
every  country  abounds,  and  who  thrive  best  in  making  opposi- 
tion to  the  existing  state  of  things,  and  slandering  whoever  is 
great  in  the  estimation  of  others,  had  now  a  reasonable  cause 
to  make  themselves  heard,  and  to  overturn  the  throne  of  David. 
Another  cause  of  dissatisfaction  given  by  David  was  his 
want  of  energy  in  the  exercise  of  his  paternal  authority,  which 
brought  disgrace  on  his  neglected  sons.  David  had  nineteen 
legitimate  sons  and  one  daughter,  besides  the  children  of  the 
concubines  (I  Chron.  ii\),  of  which  Amnon,  son  of  Ahinoam, 
the  second  wife  of  David — Michal  had  no  children — was  the 
firstborn.  Absalom,  son  of  Maachah,  who  was  the  daughter  of 
Talmai,  king  of  Geshur,  a  Syrian  province,  was  the  third  son 
of  David.  He  had  a  sister,  named  Thamar,  with  whom 
Amnon  fell  in  love.  The  prince  grieved  much  about  his  un- 
happy love,  so  that  a  prudent  courtier,  Jonadab,  the  nephew 
of  David,  observed  the  melancholy  humor  of  the  prince,  and 
succeeded  in  learning  the  secret  cause  of  it.  Amnon  succeeded, 
by  the  cunning  advice  of  his  cousin,  in  bringing  Thamar  to 
his  private  apartments,  where  he  not  only  violated  the  chastity 
of  his  half-sister,  notwithstanding  her  truly  intelligent  and 
persuading  prayer  not  to  disgrace  her,  but  also  rudely  misused 
her  after  the  diabolical  act  was  committed.  The  melancholy 
complaint  of  Thamar  grieved  David  very  much,  but  he  did 
neither  punish  nor  even  admonish  Amnon.  Absalom  was 
infuriated  by  the  disgraceful  act,  and  thought  of  vengeance. 
He  made  no  show  of  his  anger,  but  patiently  waited  for  an 
opportunity  to  give  satisfaction  to  his  sister.  Absalom  had  an 
estate  in  Baal  Hazor,  in  Ephraim,  to  which  place  he  invited 
the  royal  princes,  with  permission  of  the  king,  to  the  annual 
festivities,  on  the  occasion  of  shearing  the  sheep.  He  suc- 
ceeded in  bringing  Amnon  to  that  place,  who,  when  he  had 
partaken  freely  of  the  wine,  was,  by  orders  of  Abasalom, 
attacked  and  killed  by  the  servants  of  the  offended  brother; 
upon  which  Absalom  sought  refuge  with  his  grandfather,  the 
king  of  Geshur.  David  mourned  the  loss  of  his  eldest  son, 
but  he  took  no  measures  to  punish  Absalom.     Three  years  of 


350  PERIOD    III. 

absence  had  not  only  obliterated  the  crime  of  Absalom  from 
the  memory  of  David,  but  he  also  desired  to  see  him  again. 
Joab  observed  that  desire,  and  by  a  prudent  contrivance  of  his 
own,  and  the  cooperation  of  a  wise  woman  from  Thekoa,  he 
persuaded  the  king  to  recall  his  son  from  exile.  The  words 
of  the  woman  are  strongly  characteristic  of  the  high  state  of 
mental  culture  of  that  age,  and  the  respect  paid  to  the  law  and 
the  king.  Absalom  returned  to  Jerusalem,  but  he  was  excluded 
from  the  court  and  all  the  honors  connected  with  that  station. 
Joab  refused  to  plead  for  him  with  the  king  and  to  visit  Absa- 
lom. The  latter  resorted  to  the  strange  stratagem  of  setting 
on  fire  the  barley  on  one  of  Joab-s  fields,  which  caused  Joab  to 
pay  a  visit  to  Absalom,  demanding  explanation  of  the  strange 
behavior.  Joab  was  won  in  favor  of  the  prince,  the  king 
was  reconciled,  and  Absalom  again  took  his  station  at  the 
royal  court,  which  he  desired,  as  the  consequences  show,  for 
the  purpose  of  having  a  better  chance  to  conspire  against  his 
own  father.  He  not  only  indulged  in  an  unusual  luxury,  in 
order  to  win  the  hearts  of  the  friends  of  royal  pomp  and  splen- 
dor, in  which  every  capital  abounds,  which  was  the  more 
dangerous  to  his  father,  on  account  of  the  distinguishing  beauty 
of  the  prince ;  but  he  also  persuaded,  by  promising  and  win- 
ning words  and  deportment,  the  good  natured  country  people, 
who  happened  to  meet  him,  that  there  was  no  justice  in  the 
land  as  long  as  David  reigned,  and  that  he  would  ameliorate 
the  condition  of  the  people,  if  the  destinies  of  the  land  were 
placed  in  his  hands.  Still  David  did  not  perceive  the  danger- 
ous abyss  in  which  his  son  was  preparing  to  plunge  him. 
Absalom  was  aware  that  his  father  would  not  make  him  his 
successor  to  the  throne,  and  therefore  he  endeavored  to  de- 
throne him  and  assume  the  royal  dignity  at  the  earliest  oppor- 
tunity. Ahitophel,  the  private  counsellor  of  David,  was  the 
chief  leader  of  affairs  for  Absalom,  and  so  this  ambitious  and 
reckless  youth  suceeeded  in  producing  a  secret  and  wide-spread 
conspiracy  against  his  father.  He  sought  to  unite  in  his  own 
favor  all  the  enemies  of  David;  speaking  only  of  his  desire  to 
be  judge  of  Israel,  as  in  the  times  of  the  republic  (II  Samuel  xv, 


CHAPTER    VIII.  S51 

4),  which  was  the  more  credible,   since  he  had  no  son  (ibid 
xviii,  18):  he  won  for  himself  both  the  republicans  and  oppo- 
nents   of   a  hereditary    power.     The    friends    of   Saul    gladly 
embraced  the  opportunity  to  dethrone  David,  and  the  men  of 
Jehudah  thought  of  rising  again  to  supremacy  under  the  youth- 
ful ruler.     The  fratricide  of  Absalom  was  considered,  as  it 
would  have  been   among  most  of  the   ancient  nations,  a  just 
revenge  for  the  degradation  of  his  sister,   while   the  faults  of 
David  were  thought  unpardonable.     The  beautiful  appearance 
and  the  luxury  of  Absalom,  swelled  the  sum  of  his  advantages. 
The  fact  that  Ahitophel  and  Amasai  joined  in  the  conspiracy, 
gives  us  just  ground  to  suppose  that  many  more  of  the  high 
officers  of  David  were  connected  with  Absalom.     The  time  of 
this  revolution  can  not  be  fixed  precisely,  but  so  much  is  sure, 
that  it  occurred  during  the  first  half  of  the  last  ten  years  of 
the  reign  of  David.     The  king  of  Geshur  certainly   did  not 
give  his  daughter  to  an  adventurer.     "We  may  therefore  take 
for  granted,  that  this  marriage  of  David  took  place  while  he 
was  king  of  Jehudah,  as  the  author  of  Chronicles   informs  us 
that  Absalom  was  born  in  Hebron.     He  was  not  a  lad  when  he 
killed  his  brother  Amnon,  after  which  he  stayed  three  years  in 
Geshur  and  two  years  in  Jerusalem.     Consequently  he   must 
have  been  now  nearly  thirty  years  of  age,  which  brings  the 
event  up  to  the  thirty-second  year  of  the  reign  of  David. 

Absalom,  on  permission  of  the  king,  went  to  Hebron  to  pay 
a  vow,  as  he  told  the  king,  which  he  had  made  in  Geshur. 
Accompanied  by  two  hundred  innocent  men,  he  arrived  at  He- 
bron, where  on  a  given  signal  the  conspirators  assembled 
around  him,  and  he  had  in  a  short  time  a  sufficient  army  to 
march  against  Jerusalem.  When  the  king  received  information 
of  the  conspiracy  of  his  unnatural  son,  he  was  so  unprepared, 
that  he  could  not  take  any  effectual  measures  against  the 
rebels.  His  active  army  stationed  at  Jerusalem  was  numerically 
insignificant — which  is  strong  evidence  against  the  existence 
of  a  military  despotism  which  some  say  existed  under  David. 
David  never  put  much  confidence  in  walls,  gates  and  bars;  in 
the  present  instance  he  was  even  afraid  the  capital  might  suffer 


352  PERIOD     III. 

too  much  by  the  attack ;  and  so  he  left  the  city  with  all  possible 
speed,  accompanied  by  his  veteran  soldiers  and  officers  of  the 
army,  the  faithful  Joab  and  Abishai,  the  Cherethi,  Pelethi  and 
six  hundred  men  of  Gath,  who  happened  to  be  in  the  capital, 
Ithai,  a  man  of  Gath,  the  high  priest,  his  proxy  and  all  the 
Levites  on  duty  with  the  ark,  and  the  king's  family,  with  the 
exception  of  ten  concubines.  David  fled.  The  man  who  never 
fled  before  an  enemy,  never  was  moved  by  the  approach  of 
danger;  the  man  who  fought  so  many  battles,  routed  so  many 
armies,  before  whom  so  many  had  trembled,  now  fled  before  his 
own  son,  accompanied  by  a  lamenting  multitude.  The  fidelity 
of  Ithai,  as  described  by  our  sources,  is  a  moving  example  of 
friendship,  and  testifies  to  the  best  advantage  of  the  good  gov- 
ernment of  David  in  Gath.  Crossing  the  brook  Kidron,  the 
king  observed  the  priests  with  the  ark.  He  ordered  them  back 
to  the  city,  in  order  to  serve  his  cause  there,  where  they  natu- 
rally must  have  been  of  more  service  to  the  king  than  on  the 
road.  David  then  ascended  Mount  Olive,  where  he  learned 
that  Ahitophel  was  among  the  conspirators,  which  was  a  sor- 
rowful message  to  the  king,  knowing  the  abilities  of  his 
counsellor.  But  in  the  mean  time  he  recognized  his  friend 
Hushai ;  this  man  was  as  high  in  authority  as  Ahitophel.  He 
was  sent  back  immediately  to  counteract  the  advices  of  Ahito- 
phel, he  was  told  to  communicate  with  the  high  priest,  and  his 
proxy,  who  by  means  of  their  two  sons  would  inform  the  king 
of  all  steps  taken  in  the  capital. 

The  greatness  of  David  was  never  manifested  to  better  ad- 
vantage than  by  these  hasty  measures,  taken  in  a  moment 
of  adversity,  confusion  and  feebleness,  for  these  measures 
saved  him.  When  proceeding,  he  was  met  by  Zibah,  the 
stewart  of  Mephibosheth,  who  brought  asses,  provisions,  and 
wine,  informing  the  king  of  the  joy  of  Mephibosheth  at  the 
flight  of  the  king.  David  knowing  the  part  which  the  friends 
of  Saul  had  in  the  present  conspiracy,  believed  the  false  re- 
port, and  presented  Zibah  with  the  whole  property  of  Mephi- 
bosheth. Proceeding  eastward  toward  the  Jordan  they  reached 
Bahurim  where  a  man  of  the  family  of  Saul,   Shimei,  son  of 


CHAPTER    VIII.  353 

Gera,  came  out,  cursed  the  king  and  threw  stones  at  him  and 
his  friends.  Abishai,  enraged  by  that  behavior,  begged  leave  of 
the  king  to  slay  the  dog,  as  he  called  Shimei;  but  David,  not 
losing  his  patience  for  a  moment,  forbade  him  to  touch  the 
man.  The  king  and  his  suite  rested  at  Bahurim.  The  words 
of  David  and  the  psalms  composed  on  this  occasion  (Psalms 
iii,  lv,  and  others),  are  truly  heart-rending  and  indicative  of  a 
pious,  strong  and  confident  mind.  David  in  his  misfortune  is 
greater  than  ever. 

Absalom  had  taken  possession  of  Jerusalem,  and  received 
the  congratulations  of  the  people.  The  appearance  of  Hushai, 
the  friend  of  David,  surprised  the  ambitious  youth ;  but  the  ex- 
perienced statesman  knew"  how  to  win  the  confidence  of  the 
new  king,  to  whom  his  wise  counsel  was  welcome.  On  the 
advice  of  Ahitophel,  Absalom  took  formal  possession  of  the 
concubines  of  his  father,  showing  his  intention  to  step  into  the 
rights  of  the  king.  Ahitophel  advised  him  to  pursue  David 
without  delay,  before  the  king  succeeded  in  collecting  and 
organizing  an  army,  which  would  result  in  the  destruction  of 
David;  but  Hushai  was  not  satisfied  with  the  advice  of  Ahito- 
phel; he  supposed  it  to  be  a  hazardous  movement  to  attack  the 
heroic  band  of  the  king  in  the  open  field  with  so  small  an  army 
as  Absalom  had;  the  loss  of  the  first  battle  would  lessen  the 
confidence  of  the  people;  and  besides  this,  it  was  certain  that 
the  king  did  not  stay  with  his  army,  consequently  could  not  be 
captured.  His  advice  was  to  concentrate  a  large  army,  then 
to  crush  at  once  the  king  and  his  small  force.  Hushai  informed 
the  high  priests  of  the  advice  of  Ahitophel  and  also  of  his 
own,  not  knowing  yet  which  would  be  adopted.  The  sons  of 
the  high  priests  were  dispatched  to  David,  who  took  the  pre- 
caution to  set  over  Jordan  that  very  night.  The  plan  of 
Hushai  was  adopted  at  Jerusalem ;  David  had  respite  to  gather 
and  organize  an  army.  Ahitophel  saw  that  the  cause  of  Absa- 
lom was  lost,  that  death  awaited  him,  when  the  king  returned, 
and  so  he  left  Absalom  and  committed  suicide. 

Amasai,  the  son  of  a  half  sister  of  David  and  of  a  Jishma- 
lite,  the  same  who  made  common  cause  with  David  when  he 
23 


354  PERIOD     III. 

was  persecuted  by  Saul  (I  Chron.  xii,  18),  was  appointed 
chief  captain  of  the  army  of  Absalom,  which,  when  numerically 
strong  enough,  crossed  over  the  Jordan  to  attack  David,  who  had 
made  his  head  quarters  at  Mahanaim,  the  former  residence  of 
Ish  Bosheth.  It  must  be  noticed  here,  that  while  in  Mahanaim 
David  was  visited  by  Shubi,  son  of  Nahash,  a  royal  prince  of 
Ammon;  Mahir,  son  of  Amiel,  the  former  host  of  Mephibo- 
sheth,  and  Barzilai  a  Gileadite,  who  provided  the  king  and  his 
army  with  all  the  necessary  articles.  This  again  speaks  highly 
in  favor  of  the  Davidian  government  in  the  conquered  provinces. 
Gilead  was  a  loyal  land,  David  always  mentioned  Gilead  first 
when  speaking  of  his  possessions.  The  warriors  of  Gilead 
flocked  to  the  standards  of  David ;  troops  could  also  be  obtain- 
ed from  the  garrisons  of  Ammon,  Moab,  Bostra  and  Damascus; 
and  so  David  succeeded  in  concentrating  a  considerable  army 
around  Mahanaim. 

The  troops  were  divided  into  three  divisions  under  the 
command  of  Joab,  Abishai  and  Ithai,  and  in  this  way  they 
marched  to  meet  the  enemy,  who  was  stationed  in  a  forest  near 
Mahanaim,  called  the  forest  of  Ephraim.  David,  by  the  ex- 
press will  of  his  officers,  had  to  remain  in  the  city,  on  which 
occasion  the  Psalm  ex  was  addressed  to  him.  The  Davidian 
army  opened  the  attack  upon  the  numerous  army  of  Absalom 
in  the  forest  of  Ephraim.  The  experience  of  Joab  and  Abishai 
and  most  likely  also  of  Ithai,  the  bravery  of  their  veteran 
troops,  and  the  inspiration  of  the  Gileadites  for  the  cause 
which  they  served,  did  not  leave  room  to  doubt  the  success  of 
the  Davidian  troops.  The  army  of  Absalom  was  defeated, 
covering  the  battle  field  with  twenty  thousand  dead,  and  Absa- 
lom fled.  Riding  on  a  mule,  his  hair  caught  in  the  branches 
of  a  tree ;  the  mule  ran  off,  and  he  was  found  by  a  soldier  sus- 
pended on  the  tree.  The  soldier  who  discovered  him,  remem- 
bering the  express  command  of  the  king,  did  not  kill  Absalom, 
but  he  told  Joab  of  his  situation.  Joab  with  his  arm-bearers 
hastened  to  the  spot,  and  notwithstanding  he  was  put  in  mind 
of  the  king's  orders,  he  bade  his  men  kill  Absalom,  who  im- 
mediately executed  the  orders  of  their  chief.     A  heap  of  stona 


CHAPTER    VIII.  355 

covered  the  body  of  the  unnatural  son,  who  had  been  ambitious 
enough  to  erect  to  himself  a  monument  in  a  place  called  king's 
valley,  that  his  name  might  be  remembered;  who  was  base 
enough  to  conspire  against  the  life  of  his  own  father;  and 
who  was  vain  enough  to  believe  himself  sufficiently  prudent 
and  powerful  to  dethrone  David.  There  was  buried  an  am- 
bitious, vain,  base  and  dangerous  man;  Joab  had  a  right  to 
kill  him.  David  was  aware,  that  it  was  the  advice  of  Ahito- 
phel,  and  his  own  carelessness  and  fondness  of  his  sons,  which 
misled  Absalom  to  that  impardonable  step ;  he  therefore  or- 
dered his  officers  not  to  kill  him,  and  when  the  victorious 
army  returned  to  the  city,  David,  who  had  been  informed  of 
the  death  of  his  son,  did  not  receive  them  as  was  expected 
under  such  circumstances.  He  retired  to  a  chamber,  and  gave 
himself  up  to  a  heart-rending  lamentation  for  his  son.  Who 
can  blame  the  father  for  lamenting  over  his  son.  David  was 
one  of  those  precious  characters,  whose  human  sentiments 
were  not  crushed,  either  under  the  weight  of  a  crown,  or 
under  the  iron  practice  of  a  military  life.  He  was  a  poet  of 
profound  sentiments,  a  too-fond  father  and  husband,  although 
he  was  both  a  bold  warrior  and  a  prudent  statesman.  The 
lamentations  of  the  king  embarrassed  the  army,  and  Joab 
moved  the  king  by  rational  grounds  and  mean  menaces  to  ad- 
dress his  warriors,  which  David  reluctantly  did. 

Absalom  and  his  army  were  slain;  but  the  nation  bled  from 
twenty  thousand  wounds.  No  enthusiastic  voice  greeted  this 
time  the  victory  of  David,  none  told  him  to  return  to  Jerusalem ; 
the  friends  of  David  in  vain  praised  his  exploits,  his  services 
rendered  to  the  country.  The  embarrassment  of  David  must 
have  been  considerable;  to  march  upon  Jerusalem  and  take 
possession  of  the  throne  with  military  force  was  a  hazardous 
game,  which  might  have  estranged  from  him  even  the  hearts  of 
his  friends ;  delay  was  no  less  dangerous,  the  land  was  without  a 
government,  another  adventurer  might  succeed  in  collecting  an 
army,  which,  if  better  managed,  might  secure  success.  David 
waited  in  vain  for  the  voice  of  the  people.  Nothing  was  heard; 
a  death-like  silence  pervaded  the  country,  and  he  saw   himself 


356  PERIOD    III. 

obliged  to  resort  to  a  secret  policy,  in  which  Zadok  and 
Abiathar,  high  priest  and  proxy,  were  his  agents.  The  secret 
promise  given  to  Amasai,  Absalom's  chief  captain,  to  let  him 
into  the  high  position  he  then  occupied,  proves  sufficiently, 
that  the  enemy  was  only  restrained,  by  no  means  annihilated. 
It  must  be  remembered,  that  David  had  a  right  to  depose  Joab, 
who  had  acted  contrary  to  the  express  orders  of  the  king,  and 
no  monarch  in  our  days  would  hesitate  to  dispose  of  a  disobe- 
dient officer,  whatever  services  he  might  have  rendered.  Zadok, 
Abiathar  and  Amasai  succeeded  in  winning  over  the  tribe  of 
Jehudah,  who  sent  ambassadors  to  David  to  bring  him  back  to 
Jerusalem.  On  reaching  the  Jordan,  the  king  was  met  by 
Shimei,  son  of  Gera,  who  came  at  the  head  of  a  thousand  Ben- 
jamites,  and  Ziba,  with  fifteen  sons  and  twenty  servants,  to 
beg  pardon  of  the  king.  David,  notwithstanding  the  sanguinary 
advice  of  Abishai  to  the  contrary,  was  prudent  enough  to  grant 
pardon.  Barzilai  too  had  come  to  accompany  the  king  across 
the  Jordan.  The  king  offered  to  his  loyal  benefactor  the  hos- 
pitality of  the  royal  court,  which  Barzilai,  being  eighty  years 
of  age,  respectfully  declined,  recommending  his  son  Chimhon 
to  the  royal  patronage,  who  followed  the  king  to  Jerusalem. 
Arrived  at  Gilgal  the  king  was  received  by  the  deputies  of  half 
of  the  people  besides  Jehudah,  who  brought  him  back  to 
Jerusalem.  But  our  a,uthor  has  not  a  word  to  say  of  any  kind 
of  enthusiasm  greeting  the  king  in  the  country  or  in  the  capi- 
tal; no  hymn,  no  psalm  has  reached  us  indicative  thereof; 
which  fully  justifies  us  in  believing  that  there  were  no  manifest- 
ations of  joy  on  the  king's  return  to  the  government.  David 
punished  none  of  the  rebels;  Amasai  was  made  chief  captain, 
Benaiah,  son  of  Jehoiadah,  the  commander  of  the  Chereti  and 
Peleti,  was  appointed  to  the  place  of  Ahitophel,  the  government 
had  resumed  its  former  appearance,  when  a  debate  of  the 
national  council  suddenly  gave  rise  to  a  new  and  more  threat- 
ening revolt  than  the  first.  The  cause  of  the  protracted  debate 
was  the  arrogance  of  Jehudah  in  recalling  the  king  without  the 
consent  of  the  other  tribes;  the  desire  of  Jehudah  for  suprem- 
acy was  too  visible  in  the  act  to  have  passed  unnoticed.     The 


CHAPTER    VIII.  357 

representatives  of  Jehudah  became  insolent,  and  the  excitement 
run  high.  Sheba,  son  of  Bichri,  a  Benjamite,  residing  on 
Mount  Ephraim,  was  present,  and,  improving  the  opportunity, 
he  succeeded  in  turning  the  scale  in  favor  of  republicanism. 
Open  rebellion  against  David  was  proclaimed  in  many  districts, 
and  the  representatives  of  the  tribes,  Jehudah  excepted,  left 
the  national  council. 

The  king  gave  orders  to  Amasai  to  call  out  the  warriors  of 
Jehudah  to  quell  this  new  revolution;  but  he  did  not  succeed 
in  so  doing  in  the  time  given  by  the  king.  Being  afraid  the 
warriors  of  Jehudah  might  again  betray  him,  David  apprehend- 
ed more  danger  from  Sheba  than  from  Absalom ;  consequently  he 
gave  orders  to  Abishai  to  take  the  troops  ready  for  action  and 
pursue  after  the  republican  leader.  Abishai  left  Jerusalem  at 
the  head  of  the  troops,  accompanied  by  Joab,  whose  address 
and  courage  was  for  this  time  almost  indispensably  necessary. 
On  reaching  Gibeon  they  met  with  Amasai.  Joab  reenacted  the 
foul  play  of  which  Abner  had  been  the  victim ;  he  assassinated 
his  own  cousin  Amasai.  One  of  the  warriors  exclaimed: 
"Whoever  loves  Joab  and  David  follow  after  Joab,"  and  the 
whole  host  followed  after  Joab.  So  this  violent  and  cruel  man 
was  again  at  the  head  of  the  army.  He  again  signalized  his 
name.  All  gates  were  open  before  the  man  whose  very  name 
struck  terror  to  every  heart,  and  spread  dismay  far  and  wide; 
the  warlike  flocked  again  to  his  standards,  and  he  pursued 
after  Sheba,  whom  he  finally  found  confiding  in  the  strong 
walls  of  Abel-Beth-Maachah.  But  the  man  who  had  taken 
Rabbath  Aramon  and  Petra;  who  was  the  first  upon  the 
walls  of  Zion,  did  not  pay  much  attention  to  fortifications. 
Arrangements  were  made  to  take  the  city  by  assault,  which  a 
wise  woman  prevented  by  assassinating  Sheba  and  throwing 
his  head  over  the  wall.  The  death  of  the  leader  discomfited 
the  party,  and  peace  was  restored  to  the  country. 

David,  it  appears,  was  unable  to  depose  Joab,  who  was  the 
soul  of  the  army,  however  desirous  he  was  to  do  so,  as  the 
Psalm  ex,  and  other  psalms  plainly  suggest,  as  he  in  fact  had 
twice   attempted  in  vain.     Tranquility  and  confidence  in  the 


358  PERIOD    III. 

government  gradually  returned;  and  David,  as  Psalm  xviii 
shows,  thought  himself  secure  on  his  throne;  but  it  was  not  so 
with  the  hereditary  interests  of  his  family.  The  last  commo- 
tion convinced  him,  that  the  house  of  Saul  had  more  friends 
than  he  had  supposed;  and  there  were  still  alive  several  mem- 
bers of  that  family.  A  famine,  which  lasted  for  three  years, 
gave  a  pretext  for  the  horrible  act  of  extinguishing  that  un- 
fortunate house.  Phenomena  of  an  unusual  nature  were 
always  taken  as  a  proof  of  God's  wrath  on  account  of  a  par- 
ticular sin;  this  time  David  was  informed,  our  text  says  by 
God,  that  the  famine  occurred  on  account  of  the  sins  of  Saul,  in 
having  massacred  the  Gibeonites,  well  known  for  their  treaty 
with  Joshua.  But  it  is  evident  that  God  never  before  commu- 
nicated with  David,  which  justifies  the  critics  in  suspecting 
this  passage. 

The  tradition  says,  that  seven  of  the  Gibeonites,  being  em- 
ployed in  the  lower  kind  of  work  for  the  national  sanctuary, 
were  killed  with  the  priests  at  Nob ;  it  is  therefore  likely,  that 
the  priests  cooperated  with  David  in  this  most  abominable  act. 
The  Gibeonites  were  asked,  what  should  be  done  to  them  to 
reconcile  them  ?  They  demanded  seven  men  of  the  unhappy 
house  of  Saul  to  be  executed  for  their  brethren  killed  by  order 
of  that  king.  David  without  asking  the  advice  of  any  one  on 
that  serious  demand,  and  in  defiance  of  the  laws  (Deutr.  xxiv, 
16),  delivered  up  to  the  Gibeonites  the  two  sons  of  the  faithful 
Rizpah,  daughter  of  Aiah,  concubine  of  Saul,  and  the  five 
sons  of  Merab,  eldest  daughter  of  Saul,  who  executed  them  on 
a  mountain,  and,  again  in  defiance  of  the  laws  (Deutr.  x,  22, 
23),  merely  to  frighten  the  friends  of  that  unhappy  house, 
they  remained  unburied  for  many  weeks.  Only  Mephibosheth, 
the  son  of  Jonathan,  the  devoted  servant  of  David,  who  being 
lame  was  not  dangerous  to  the  Davidian  dynasty,  was  spared; 
but  he  was  unjustly  deprived  of  half  of  his  property,  which 
David  gave  to  Zibah,  who  betrayed  his  master,  and  imposed 
falsehoods  upon  the  king.  There  is  no  law  for  kings  when  the 
interests  of  the  dynasty  are  in  danger?  the  Davidian  dynasty 
too  was  established  upon  the  blood  of  many  innocent  persons, 


CHAPTER  VIII.  359 

and  against  the  will  of  the  people.  Rizpah,  the  unfortunate 
mother,  watched  the  bodies  of  the  seven  executed  sons  and 
grandsons  of  Saul,  protecting  them  from  the  hungry  birds 
of  prey  and  ferocious  beasts.  David  was  informed  of  it,  cer- 
tainly not  in  the  most  pleasant  manner ;  the  superstitious  may 
have  been  satisfied,  but  the  just  and  enlightened  certainly  were 
not.  He  disinterred  the  bodies  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  at  Jabash, 
and  together  with  the  bodies  of  the  executed  members  of  that 
house,  they  were  buried  in  the  sepulchre  of  Kish,  Saul's  father. 
What  can  justify  David  for  this  act  of  inhumanity?  If  the 
famine  was  a  consequence  of  the  late  commotions,  as  it  most 
likely  was,  which  was  chiefly  ascribed  to  the  friends  of  Saul, 
it  was  deemed  necessary  to  crush  that  party;  David,  in  order 
to  prevent  the  reenactment  of  such  scenes  of  convulsion  and 
bloodshed,  had  a  certain  right  to  resort  to  these  bloody 
measures,  if  the  voice  of  God  ordaining  this  decree  was  the 
voice  of  the  senate.  But  could  not  the  same  end  have  beeu 
reached  in  a  more  humane  way,  if  David  had  possessed  the 
moral  courage  to  resign  the  claims  of  his  unborn  successors  to 
the  throne?  Many  misfortunes  of  the  nation  would  have  been 
prevented,  and  David's  name  would  be  the  glory  of  kings,  and 
the  pride  of  humanity. 

The  next  care  of  David  must  have  been  to  secure  to  the 
capital  the  predominance  over  all  other  cities,  so  that  the  royal 
court  and  the  officers  of  the  government  be  surrounded  by  a 
sacred  nimbus ;  to  which  purpose  he  had  brought  the  ark  to 
Jerusalem,  had  erected  for  it  a  new  pavilion,  and  surrounded  it 
with  all  the  pomp  which  the  law  permitted.  His  endeavors 
to  build  a  temple  were  in  vain,  the  people  considered  it  an 
innovation,  God  had  never  commanded  any  one  to  build  him  a 
temple,  was  the  very  message  which  David  received  by  the 
prophet  Nathan;  they  especially  considered  David,  who  had 
shed  so  much  blood,  unworthy  of  such  a  sacred  enterprise. 
The  sanctity  and  importance  of  the  Davidian  tabernacle  was 
greatly  diminished  by  the  existence  of  the  Mosaic  tabernacle 
at  Gideon,  a  city  of  priests,  where  the  people  still  sacrificed 
and  which  was  still  in  high  estimation  among  the  pious;  so 


360  PERIOD    III. 

Jerusalem  was  not  yet  the  center  of  the  land;  the  center  of 
gravity  of  the  Mosaic  policy  still  was  in  Gibeon  (I  Chron.  xxi, 
29).     An  accident,  of  which  David  made  the  right  use,  brought 
him  also  nearer  to  the  execution  of  this  most  requisite  enter- 
prise.     Joab,  by  order  of  the  king,  took  the   census  of  the 
people,  and  he  found  in  Israel  eight  hundred  thousand,  and  in 
Jehudah  five  hundred  thousand  men,  able  to  do  military  service. 
The  total  number  of  souls  must  have  been  near  five  millions. 
A  plague  raged  afterwards  in  Israel  for  one  day,  and  swept 
away  seventy  thousand  victims.     The  popular  aversion  to  the 
act  of  counting  the  people  at  large,  was  rationally  based  upon 
the  fear  of  a  consolidation  of  power  in  the  royal  government, 
and   crushing  the  independence  of  the  tribes.     The  wrath  of 
God,  in  having  sent  a  plague,  was  for  this  time  ascribed  to  the 
impiety  of  David,  who  had  taken  the  census  in  opposition  to 
ancient  custom,  which  gave  this  right  to  the  heads  of  the  dif- 
ferent  tribes.*      But   David   knew  how  to   use    every  event 
advantageously.     While  yet  the  plague  was  raging,  he  ascended 
Mount  Moriah,  the  third  hill  of  Jerusalem,  occupied  by  Anion, 
the  Jebusite,  and  erected  an  altar  to  stop  the  plague,  because  he 
could  not  go  to  Gibeon,  fearing  the  rage  of  the  angel  of  destruc- 
tion— (I    Chron.  xxi,    30) — in   the    threshing-floor  of  Arnon, 
which  he  bought  of  that  descendant  of  the  royal  line  of  the 
Jebusite  for  fifty  shekels  of  silver.     The  prophet,  Gad,  assisted 
the   king,   and  the  plague    was   marvelously  stopped.      This 
stratagem  was  a  happy  one;    the  place  was  consecrated;  the 
altar  by  which  the  miracle  was  wrought  remained  there;  the 
king  succeeded  in  arresting  the  dreadful  malady ;  there  must  be 
the  portals  of  heaven;  a  temple  must  be  erected  on  the  spot 
to  eternize  the  glorious  event.     David  completed  a  plan  for  the 
temple,  the  execution  of  which  was  entrusted  to  his  successor 
in    office,   as   he  himself  had  become  too  old  to  execute    his 
gigantic  idea,  besides,  the  current  of  popular  prejudices  was  too 
much  opposed  to  him. 

The  days   of  David  were  numbered;  his  energies  gradually 

*  Numbers  i,  2-17:  xxvi. 


CHAPTER    VIII.  561 

vanished ;  and  even  the  beautiful  Abishag-ha-Shunamith  suc- 
ceeded not  in  reanimating  the  declining  spark  of  life.*  It  was 
time  now  to  appoint  his  successor.  He,  therefore,  appeared 
before  the  senate  (I  Chron.  xxviii),  and  stated  to  them  his 
will,  that  Solomon,  his  son,  should  reign  after  him;  whom 
God  had  chosen  to  succeed  him,  and  to  build  the  temple  on 
Mount  Mori  ah,  for  which  he  had  made  the  plan,  that  was  now 
laid  before  them.  The  senate  consented  to  the  choice  of  the 
king  among  his  sons,  as  Solomon  must  have  been  a  beloved 
and  known  poet,  and  renowned  for  his  brilliant  endowments, 
although  he  was  but  a  3roung  man. 

Adoniah,  son  of  David,  and  Hagith,  and,  as  it  appears, 
also  the  other  royal  princes,  were  not  satisfied  with  the  appoint- 
ment of  Solomon.  Joab  also  disliked  Solomon  on  account  of 
his  peace-loving  policy;  and  Abiathar,  the  high  priest's  proxy, 
who  supposed  he  had  a  rightful  claim  upon  the  highest  dignity, 
also  assisted  Adoniah.  This  prince,  comparing  to  Absalom  in 
beauty,  reckoning  upon  the  fondness  of  his  father,  his  slackness 
of  energy  on  account  of  old  age,  and  upon  the  army  being  on 
his  side  on  account  of  Joab,  proclaimed  himself  successor  of  his 
father.  David  was  informed  of  this  second  revolt  of  his  sons, 
which  was  supported  again  by  Jehudah,  and  all  the  royal 
princes.  Bath  Sheba,  the  mother  of  Solomon,  and  Nathan,  the 
prophet,  persuaded  the  king  to  take  speedy  and  efficient  mea- 
sures. But  this  time  it  was  only  necessary  to  declare  by  a 
public  act,  that  Solomon,  and  not  Adoniah,  was  appointed  to 
succeed  the  king.  The  high  priest  Zadok,  the  prophet  Nathan, 
president  of  the  senate,  and  Beniali,  son  of  Jehoiada,  first 
counsellor  of  the  king,  were  appointed  to  anoint  Solomon,  and 
to  proclaim  him  successor  of  David.  The  act  took  place  pub- 
licly at  the  Creek  Gihon,  where  the  people  assembled  to  a  great 
feast,  and  cheered  the  young  king.  Adoniah  on  hearing  this 
tidings,  fled  into  the  tabernacle,  fearing  for  his  life;  but  Solomon 

*  According  to  R.  J.  Wunderbar,  the  story  of  Abishag  proves,  that  the 
physicians  of  that  age  were  acquainted  with  the  effect  of  the  animal  mag- 
netism of  Gerocomy.  The  embraces  of  Abishag  should  enliven  the  energies  of 
David  (Biblisch-talmudische  MeJicin,  2  Heft,  s.  15,  Leipzig,  1S51). 


362  PERIOD    III. 

assured  him  of  his  fraternal  intentions,  and  so  no  other  conse- 
quences were  feared. 

Shortly  after  this  event,  David  charged  his  son  to  govern  the 
nation  according  to  the  laws  of  Moses,  which  would  make  him 
wise  and  happy.  He  recommended  to  his  especial  favor  the  sons 
of  Barzilai,  who  supported  him  in  Mahanaim.  He  also  exhorted 
him  not  to  let  the  crimes  of  Joab,  and  the  curses  of  Shimei, 
son  of  Gera,  go  unpunished.  Abishai  probably  died  shortly 
before.  David  died  at  the  age  of  seventy  years,  after  a  reign 
of  fort)^  years.  He  was  great  as  a  poet,  a  soldier  and  a  mili- 
tary leader,  but  still  greater  as  a  statesman.  His  prudence, 
sagacity,  and  quietude  in  the  management  of  public  affairs,  is 
an  eminent  example  of  statesmanship.  He  received  a  country 
surrounded  by  enemies,  and  distracted  by  internal  discord;  he 
left  after  thirty-three  years  the  same  land  rich,  prosperous, 
united,  strong;  its  boundaries  widely  enlarged,  and  its  enemies 
subdued.  Literature,  intelligence  and  enlightenment  progressed 
rapidly  under  his  sway,  and  Israel  had  reached  the  highest 
pitch  of  national  prosperity.  His  private  sins  and  faults  can 
not  impair  his  glory,  for  the  work  which  he  left  to  posterity 
was  great  and  strong.  He  was  buried  in  his  own  sepulchre,  in 
the  city  of  David. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

ADMINISTRATION  OF  SOLOMON  (1008—968  B.  C). 

Solomon  succeeded  David  in  the  government,  and  was  now 
no  longer  limited  by  the  presence  of  his  old  father;  he,  conse- 
quently, could  wield  his  sceptre  according  to  his  own  views. 
The  virtues  of  Solomon  were  great;  he  was  a  splendid  and 
ingenious  writer,  had  brilliant  wit,  was  a  scientific  man,  and 


CHAPTER    IX.  363 

although  the  son  of  a  sinful  mother,  still  he  was  a  favorite 
of  the  prophets,  which  speaks  well  for  the  mental  endowments 
of  Solomon.  But  he  had  also  his  vices ;  he  was  neglected  in  his 
moral  education,  as  were  all  the  other  sons  of  David,  growing 
up  in  harems,  which  deprived  them  of  that  energetic  activity 
characterizing  their  father.  He,  being  the  favorite  son  of  the 
king's  favorite  wife,  certainly  found  a  sufficient  number  of 
flatterers,  who  praised'his  wit  and  admired  his  ingenuity,  so 
that  he  early  learned  to  look  upon  the  people  as  beings  inferior 
to  himself  in  every  respect,  who  were  destined  to  observe  his 
plans.  This  made  Solomon  unfit  not  only  to  be  an  Israelitish 
king,  the  agent  of  Jehovah,  but  also  to  be  a  constitutional  mo- 
narch; the  venom  of  despotism  corrupted  him  in  early  youth, 
and  nothing  truly  great  could  be  expected  of  him.  It  appears, 
indeed,  that  demonstrations  against  Solomon  took  place  in  dif- 
ferent parts  of  Israel,  and  in  the  foreign  provinces,  on  which 
occasion  either  Solomon,  or  another  poet,  composed  the  second 
Psalm;  still,  the  unimpaired  strength  of  the  Davidian  army, 
now  under  the  command  of  the  veteran,  Benaiah,  son  of 
Jehoiadah,  crushed  every  attempt  of  this  kind. 

The  king's  elder  brother,  the  aforenamed  Adoniah,  had  not 
entirely  discarded  his  desire  to  mount  the  throne  of  David;  a 
secret  conspiracy  with  Joab,  now  deposed  of  his  office,  and 
with  Abiathar,  the  second  high  priest,  was  still  in  existence. 
Still,  the  extent  of  the  conspiracy  is  not  known.  It  seems, 
that  the  beautiful  Abishag,  David's  last  wife,  or  rather  nurse, 
whom  Adoniah  wished  to  possess,  was  also  concerned  in  the 
conspiracy,  who  should  strengthen  by  her  hand  the  claims  of 
that  prince.  He  succeeded  in  engaging  the  interest  of  Bath- 
sheba,  mother  of  Solomon,  to  make  his  suit  to  the  king  for  the 
hand  of  Abishag.  The  unsuspicious  woman  preferred  her 
request  to  the  king  on  behalf  of  his  brother.  But  Solomon 
understood  the  motives  of  this  especial  love  to  Abishag,  and 
he  gave  orders  to  his  chief  captain  to  slay  the  prince,  which 
orders  were  promptly  executed.  The  guilt  of  Joab  was  suffi- 
ciently demonstrated  by  his  flight  into  the  tabernacle,  and 
taking  hold  of  the  altar  when  he  had  heard  of  the  fate  of  his 


364  PERIOD    III. 

royal  friend.  Custom  prohibited  among  almost  all  nations  of 
antiquity,  the  taking  of  an  offender  from  the  altar  of  God. 
Moses  had  the  precaution  to  state,  "  If  a  man  come  presump- 
tuously upon  his  neighbor  to  slay  him  with  guile,  thou  shalt 
take  him  from  mine  altar  that  he  may  die."  Joab,  notwith- 
standing his  valor  and  brilliant  achievements,  was  an  assassin; 
the  blood  of  Abner  and  Amasai  defiled  his  fame.  Solomon, 
therefore,  gave  orders  to  kill  him  at  the  altar,  if  he  insist  upon 
dying  there,  which  was  done  accordingly.  Joab  was  an  eminent 
soldier,  a  shrewd  chief,  a  faithful  friend  of  David,  a  patriotic 
citizen;  still,  he  was  a  violent  character,  one  who  cared  little 
for  the  lives  of  a  few  men,  and  he  was  deservedly  executed. 
Abiathar  was  exiled  from  Jerusalem  to  his  country  seat  at 
Anathoth,  from  which  he  was  afterwards  recalled.  Shimei, 
son  of  Gera,  was  commanded,  under  the  penalty  of  death,  not 
to  leave  Jerusalem ;  but  he  subsequently  pursued  some  fugitive 
slaves  of  his  to  Gath,  which  cost  him  his  life.  There  can  be 
no  doubt,  that  others  were  concerned  in  this  conspiracy,  and 
that  more  than  one  life  was  sacrificed  before  Solomon  sat  safely 
upon  the  throne  of  David. 

Solomon's  first  step  towards  despotism  is  communicated  in  a 
characteristic  manner.  He  sacrificed  to  the  Lord  at  Gibeon, 
after  which  God  appeared  to  him  in  a  dream,  and  at  the  re- 
quest of  Solomon,  political  and  judicial  wisdom  superior  to  all 
men  before  him,  was  granted  to  him  by  the  favor  of  God; 
wealth  and  glory  also  were  promised  to  him  on  a  grand  scale. 
It  is  evident  that  Solomon  must  have  communicated  this  pecu- 
liar dream  to  his  friends,  who  most  likely  took  proper  care  to 
have  it  published  far  and  wide,  that  Solomon  was  the  wisest  of 
men,  gifted  with  a  superior  and  divine  intellect,  so  that  he 
needed  not  the  advice  of  the  prophets,  the  priests,  the  national 
council  or  of  any  other  man,  as  he  in  fact  never  asked  any 
man's  advice,  acting  generally  on  his  own  responsibility. 
The  question  can  only  be  whether  Solomon  indeed  had  such  a 
dream?  and  if  he  had,  whether  it  was  anything  more  than  a 
common  dream,  as  our  sources  plainly  say,  "  And  Solomon 
awoke  and  behold  it  was  a  dream!"     The  consequences  show 


CHAPTER    IX.  365 

that  he  displayed  frequently  a  pitiable  deficiency  in  governing 
the  nation,  and  that  he  disregarded  the  rights  and  laws  of  his 
subjects.  If  he  indeed  was  in  possession  of  a  higher  wisdom, 
then  wisdom  itself  is  by  no  means  a  desirable  object  to  the 
welfare  of  man  and  to  the  competency  of  kings.  To  us  this 
dream  appears  as  the  first  step  to  absolutism ;  the  brilliant 
fete  which  he  gave  to  his  courtiers  when  again  in  Jerusalem, 
was  a  cool  policy  to  give  publicity  to  this  alleged  dream,  with 
which  view  the  author  of  I  Kings  perfectly  agrees,  for  he 
communicates  to  us  a  story,  which  the  people  took  as  a  proof 
of  Solomon's  superior  wisdom,  in  which  we  discover  no  very 
remarkable  display  of  sagacity.  The  story  is  this:  Two 
harlots,  each  having  given  birth  to  a  son  on  the  same  day, 
lived  alone  in  one  house.  One  of  the  women  suffocated  her 
child,  which  she  then,  favored  by  the  sound  sleep  of  the  other 
woman,  exchanged  for  the  living  child.  Each  woman  claimed 
the  living  boy  as  her  son;  no  witness  was  there  in  favor  of 
either  one,  and  the  cause  could  not  be  decided  in  any  court, 
wherefore  it  was  brought  before  the  king,  who  relying  upon 
the  maternal  affections,  gave  orders  to  divide  each  of  the  child- 
ren into  two  parts,  and  to  give  each  woman  one  half  of  each 
child,  which,  however,  had  the  desired  effect.  The  mother  of 
the  living  child  entreated  the  king  not  to  kill  the  boy,  to  give 
him  to  the  other  party;  according  to  which  emotion  the  king 
decided,  and  the  child  was  given  to  its  mother.  It  is  plain  that 
but  little  knowledge  of  the  human  heart  was  required  to  make 
this  decision;  and  that  the  courts,  who  have  to  decide  accord- 
ing to  the  letter  of  the  law  could  not  resort  to  such  means. 
It  is  after  all  questionable  whether  the  decision  was  just. 

In  the  appointments  of  Solomon  to  office  we  see  nothing 
which  entitles  us  to  suppose  a  change  of  policy  had  taken 
place.  Solomon  appointed  Benaih  chief  captain  of  the  host, 
in  place  of  Joab,  who  was  a  faithful  friend  of  David  as  well  as 
Joab,  and  held  the  highest  positions  in  the  Davidian  court. 
The  auditor  of  David  maintained  himself  in  this  office,  although 
we  are  not  informed  how  long  he  held  it  under  Solomon. 
Zadok  and  Abiathar  also  maintained  themselves  in  their  priestly 


366  PERIOD  III. 

dignity,  and  were  afterwards  replaced  by  their  sons.  Adoni- 
rom,  son  of  Abda,  was  appointed  collector  of  the  taxes. 
Sabud,  son  of  Nathan,  became  companion,  or  friend  of  the 
king.  Only  two  new  officers  are  mentioned;  Ahishar  was 
appointed  major  domus,  governor  of  the  palace,  and  Azariah, 
with  twelve  inferior  officers,  was  appointed  provisioner  of  the 
king's  household;  but  these  last  appointments  were  not  made 
at  the  beginning  of  this  administration,  because  sons-in-law  of 
Solomon  are  mentioned  among  the  officers.  Besides  these 
officers,  mention  is  made  of  three  secretaries  of  the  king — 
Azariah,  son  of  Zadok,  the  high  priest,  Elihoreph  and  Ahiah, 
sons  of  Shisha — while  but  one  secretary  was  retained  at  the 
Davidian  court.  It  is  likely,  however,  that  the  two  privy 
counsellors,  mentioned  to  have  been  at  the  court  of  David, 
are  here  called  secretaries.  No  account  is  given  of  the  ap- 
pointment of  other  officers.  The  places  of  Nathan  and  Gad 
were  afterwards  occupied  by  Ahiah  of  Shiloh,  and  Iddo  the 
seer,  who  presided  over  the  senate. 

The  policy  of  Solomon  is  marked  more  clearly  and  definitely 
by  his  marriage  to  a  daughter  of  Pharaoh.  Palestine  then 
bordered  on  Egypt;  Idumea  was  a  Palestinian  province. 
Amalek  and  the  other  tribes  of  the  desert,  together  with  Gaza, 
were  subjected  to  Israel.  At  the  time  of  Solomon  Egypt  was 
united  and  strong.  A  war  with  Egypt  would  have  been  more 
dangerous  to  Solomon  than  the  attack  of  Hadarezer  was  to 
David,  for  Solomon  was  a  man  of  peace.  Palestine  was  the 
key  to  Egypt,  and  Egyptian  produce  could  reach  the  interior  of 
Asia  through  Palestine  only.  Egypt  was  rich  in  good  horses, 
in  linen,  fish,  and  other  articles  which  were  consumed  in 
Palestine  and  other  Asiatic  countries;  while  the  wine,  olives, 
honey,  and  wheat  of  Palestine,  and  the  manufactured  articles 
from  the  interior  of  Syria  must  have  been  desirable  articles  for 
the  Egyptian  market.  A  commercial  treaty  between  the  two 
nations  must  have  been  advantageous  to  both.  A  closer 
alliance  with  Egypt  must  also  have  had  the  effect  of  deterring 
the  subdued  provinces  from  rising  against  Solomon,  and  to  put 
down  also  the  dissatisfied  parties  in  his   own  land.     But  this 


CHAPTER    IX.  367 

alliance  was  opposed  by  ancient  prejudices,  which  was  rooted 
deeply  in  the  hearts  of  both  nations,  and  by  an  express  state- 
ment of  the  law,  still  the  eminent  popularity  which  Solomon 
enjoyed,  made  it  possible  for  him  to  overcome  this  prejudice, 
and  to  have  the  law  expounded  in  his  favor.  He  married  the 
daughter  of  Pharaoh,  and  made  her  his  favorite  queen,  build- 
ing for  her  a  separate  palace.  This  royal  alliance  inspired  an 
unnamed  poet,  of  the  sons  of  Korah,  to  a  beautiful  love  song, 
making  now  the  forty-ninth  chapter  of  Psalms,  in  which  all 
the  causes  of  that  alliance  are  set  forth  in  a  poetical  but  truth- 
ful style.  Pharaoh  went  up  to  Palestine  at  the  head  of  an 
army,  and  took  the  strong  Gezer  from  the  hands  of  the  abori- 
gines, and  gave  it  to  his  daughter  as  a  dowery.  Solomon 
himself  was  not  permitted  by  the  law  to  take  the  city  from 
the  aborigines,  still  it  was  part  of  his  policy  to  crush  them 
entirely,  and  he  resorted  to  this  policy  in  regard  to  Gezer. 

Solomon  also  cultivated  the  friendship  of  Hiram,  most  likely 
the  second,  king  of  Tyre,  with  whom  he  made  a  covenant  (I 
Kings  v,  27),  which  indicates  a  closer  alliance  than  the  one 
existing  before.  He  had  inherited  a  strong  empire  with  rich 
resources,  and  being  now  an  ally  of  the  powerful  Egypt  and 
the  rich  Tyre,  he  was  powerful  enough  to  maintain  peace  in  his 
country,  and  with  the  neighboring  nations,  and  to  develop  the 
resources  of  his  empire.  Our  author  informs  us,  "  Jehudah 
and  Israel  were  sitting  secure,  every  one  under  his  vine  and 
under  his  fig  tree,  from  Dan  to  Bear  Sheba,  all  the  days  of 
Solomon."  We  are  also  informed,  that  Solomon  reigned  over 
all  the  land,  from  the  Euphrates  to  the  Mediterranean,  and 
the  river  of  Egypt,  consequently  the  Phelistines  must  have 
been  entirely  subjected  to  the  scepter  of  Solomon;  and  also 
across  the  Euphrates  was  his  power  felt.  Whether  he  com- 
pleted the  conquest  of  the  kingdom  of  Hadarezer,  and  took 
Hamath,  as  appears  from  II  Chronicles,  viii,  3,  or  whether 
David  completed  it,  as  appears  from  I  Kings  v,  1-5,  is  hard  to 
say,  as  no  direct  accounts  are  before  us  either  way,  although 
it  is  evident  from  direct  statements  and  circumstances,  that 
the  dominion  of  Solomon  extended  at  least  as  far  as  to  the 
Euphrates,  if  not  across  that  river. 


368  PERIOD    III. 

Chariots  of  war  and  cavalry  were  not  employed  by  the 
Israelites,  although  the  aborigines  made  use  of  them.  The 
army  of  the  Israelites  was  at  first  calculated,  as  we  have  stated 
before,  to  protect  the  country,  but  after  the  dominion  of  Israel 
was  extended  over  the  vast  plains  of  Syria,  chariots  and  caval- 
ry became  indispensably  necessary.  David  himself  seems  to 
have  been  opposed  to  such  an  innovation  before  the  third 
battle  against  Hadarezer,  and  his  army  was  capable  of  defend- 
ing any  territory,  but  Solomon,  who  was  a  peculiar  friend  of 
reforms,  not  only  introduced  in  his  army  twelve  thousand 
cavalry  men,  and  had  forty  thousand  horses  for  the  chariots 
and  private  use,  but  he  also  fortified  many  cities  besides  Jeru- 
salem, among  which  are  mentioned  Hazor,  Megido,  Gezer. 
Beth  Horon,  the  upper  and  the  lower,  Baalath,  Zoba,  and  other 
cities,  which  he  garrisoned  with  Israelites  only,  and  where  the 
chariots  and  cavalry  also  were  posted.  The  connection  of 
Damascus,  Heliopolis  or  Baalbec,  Emesa  and  Bostra,  with  the 
Euphrates,  somewhere  at  Thapsacus  or  Thipsah,  was  effected 
by  the  building  of  a  new  city,  the  renowned  Tadmor,  or  Pal- 
myra, in  the  Syrian  desert,  which  enabled  Solomon  to  hold 
direct  and  uninterrupted  communication  through  the  whole  of 
his  territory,  and  to  maintain  his  authority  in  Syria.  Palmyra 
may  also  have  been  built  as  a  place  of  resort  to  the  caravans 
from  and  to  the  Euphrates,  but  its  primary  object  certainly 
was  to  have  a  direct  military  line  between  Jerusalem  and  the 
Euphrates. 

Jerusalem  itself  was  strongly  fortified,  and  the  Millo,  the 
citadel  of  Jerusalem,  was  also  provided  with  new  and  strong 
works.  When  all  these  works  were  commenced,  and  when  they 
were  finished  can  not  be  ascertained  from  our  meagre  resources, 
but  whenever  finished,  such  strong  places,  such  a  standing 
army,  and  such  immense  wealth,  were  certainly  not  calculated 
to  maintain  a  constitutional  government,  in  the  sense  of  the 
Mosaic  law;  the  propensities  of  Solomon,  together  with  these 
means,  must  have  made  of  him  what  it  would  make  of  almost 
any  ruler  in  our  days,  a  sensual,  pleasure-loving,  and  self-willed 
despot. 


CHAPTER    IX.  369 

The  safeguard  of  political  liberty  was  among  the  Israelites 
the  divine  sanctity  of  the  law,  and  the  rights  preserved  to  the 
tribes,  which  formed  a  check  upon  the  royal  prerogatives. 
David  had  already  made  attempts  to  centralize  the  nation;  but 
Solomon  divided  the  land  into  twelve  equal  districts  without 
regard  to  tribes ;  from  which  he  was  provided  with  the  articles 
of  food  for  his  household  and  for  the  army.  It  is  not  said 
whether  those  articles  were  exacted  as  a  tax  or  were  pur- 
chased, [the  latter  of  which  seems  most  plausible;  but  either 
way,  the  division  was  contrary  to  the  constitution  of  the  land, 
although  it  may  have  exercised  no  direct  influence  upon  the 
present  circumstances  of  the  nation.  The  system  of  centraliza- 
tion makes  a  large,  strong  and  attractive  capital  necessary. 
Dayid  was  aware  of  this,  and  his  plans  to  this  effect  are  known. 
The  building  of  a  splendid  temple  was  only  subservient  to  this 
political  end.  Still,  David  could  not  effect  his  purpose;  it  was 
reserved  for  Solomon,  who  resorted,  besides  the  building  of 
the  temple,  to  two  other  means,  tending  to  the  same  end;  first, 
to  an  unusual  patronage  of  learning,  and  second,  to  a  still  more 
unusual  pomp  and  luxury.  Solomon  was  himself  a  learned 
man,  and  to  him  was  ascribed  the  authorship  of  three  thousand 
proverbs — few  of  which  have  reached  us — and  one  thousand  and 
five  poems,  besides,  a  botany  and  a  zoology,  so  that  he  was 
supposed  to  be  superior  to  the  wisest  men  of  his  own  country, 
of  the  east,  and  of  Egyyt;  he  also  patronized  learning  to  a 
considerable  extent.  The  simple  institute  once  founded  at 
Raman  by  the  venerable  Samuel,  produced  now  a  rich  harvest 
at  Jerusalem.  The  mental  horizon  of  the  Israelites  had  been 
considerably  enlarged  during  the  reign  of  David;  they  had 
come  in  contact  with  Egypt  and  their  priests,  and  with  Syria 
and  the  Chaldees.  The  spirit  of  the  Mosaic  laws,  history  and 
religion,  had  been  reproduced  in  numerous  poems  and  psalms ; 
the  juvenile  portal  to  the  mansion  of  science  was  opened,  and 
so  a  scientific  era  commenced  with  Solomon.  Numerous  literati 
sprung  up  in  Israel,  whose  favor  was  of  no  small  importance 
to  the  king.  He  secured  their  favor  by  his  patronage  of  letters ; 
and  their  cooperation  in  his  own  cause  was  a  sure  consequence 
24 


370  PERIOD    III. 

of  his  policy  in  making  Jerusalem  the  chief  seat  of  learning,, 
the  central  point  of  the  literary  strength  of  the  nation.  In  this 
he  succeeded  so  well,  that  the  curious  and  inquisitive  of  many 
foreign  nations  were  attracted  to  Jerusalem  to  hear  the  wisdom 
of  Solomon,  which  must  have  been  no  mean  cause  of  ambition 
among  the  Israelitish  students,  and  certainly  gave  great  satis- 
tion  to  the  literati  or  prophets,  whose  influence  upon  the  nation 
was  considerable. 

The  building  of  the  temple  was  especially  calculated  to  win 
the  hearts  of  the  people  and  of  the  priests,  and  to  make  Jerusalem 
the  center  of  the  nation;  the  work,  therefore,  was  commenced 
as  soon  as  Solomon  had  established  his  power.  But,  however 
sacred  was  that  building,  it  was  like  all  large  buildings  of  anti- 
quity, together  with  all  the  other  buildings  Of  Solomon,  a 
monument  of  despotism.  Seventy-eight  thousand  of  the  abo- 
rigines were  unjustly  forced  to  work  for  the  public  buildings; 
seventy  thousand  of  which  were  forced  to  bear  burdens,  and 
eight  thousand  of  them  worked  in  quarries.  Thirty  thousand 
Israelites  too  were  forced  to  work  four  months  annually  for  the 
public  buildings,  so  that  always  ten  thousand  men  worked  one 
month,  and  remained  in  their  homes  for  two  months.  The 
whole  work  was  superintended  by  three  thousand  and  three 
hundred  officers  under  the  lead  of  Adoniram.  There  is  nothing 
unlikely  in  this  account;  the  fortification  of  so  many  cities,  the 
new  citadels,  Tadmor,  and  the  numerous  mansions  which 
Solomon  built,  made  such  a  multitude  of  laborers  necessary. 
Moses  had  expressly  stated,  that  they  are  only  permitted  to  buy 
slaves  of  the  aborigines,  which  could  be  done  with  their  consent 
only;  the  Gibeonites  deceived  the  Israelites,  still  they  were  not 
enslaved,  they  had  only  the  duty  to  send  drawers  of  water  and 
hewers  of  wood  to  the  house  of  the  Lord,  to  which  certainly 
but  few  men  were  wanted;  and  David  gave  them  a  bloody 
satisfaction  for  the  death  of  seven  of  their  brethren.1  The  per- 
sonal liberty  of  the  .Israelite  was  sacred  in  the  laws  of  Moses. 
But  Solomon  was  the  wisest  among  the  wise,  he  was  a  cool  and 
calculating  man;  nothing,  neither  the  laws  and  customs  of  the 
nation,  nor   the  personal  rights  of  man,  laid  any  considerable 


CHAPTER     IX.  371 

weight  into  the  scale  of  his  gigantic  plans.  Forced  labor,  un- 
doubtedly, was  illegal;  but,  at  the  same  time,  it  must  be  con- 
fessed, that  it  was  prudently  applied.  The  Israelites  learned 
in  this  way  many  of  the  useful  arts  from  the  Phoenicians ;  and 
the  aborigines,  who  had  always  coincided  with  the  enemies  of 
Israel,  were  made  powerless  of  harm. 

Solomon  had  made  a  treaty  with  Hyram,  according  to  w*hich, 
Solomon  was  provided  with  Tyrian  artists,  with  cedars  and 
cypresses,  which  were  cut  on  the  Lebanon,  transported  on  the 
shoulders  of  the  enslaved  aborigines  across  the  Phoenician 
territory  to  the  sea,  and  then  in  rafts  to  a  Palestinian  harbor; 
for  which  Solomon  gave  annually  to  Hyram  twenty  thousand 
chor  of  wheat,  and  twenty  chor  of  olive  oil. 

Our  sources  make  no  mention  of  where  the  quarries  were,  from 
which  the  "large  and  precious  stones  were  cut,  in  order  to  lay 
the  foundation  of  the  temple  with  square  stones,"  although 
there  was  no  scarcity  of  stones  in  Palestine;  still,  it  appears, 
that  the  stones  also  were  brought  from  the  quarries  east  of  the 
"Red  sea,  formerly  belonging  to  Egypt.  Ten  thousand  Israelites 
continually  worked  in  company  of  the  Tyrian  artists,  who 
mostly  came  from  Gebel,  a  place  in  Phoenicia,  distinguished 
for  its  artists;  architecture,  sculpture,  carving  and  the  kindred 
arts  were  in  this  way  learned  from  the  Phoenicians,  who  had 
reached  distinction  in  those  branches.  The  foundation  of  the 
temple  was  laid  four  hundred  and  eighty  years  after  the  exode 
( 1005  b.  c),  in  the  second  month  of  the  fourth  year  of  Solomon's 
reign,  and  the  building  was  finished  in  seven  years,  which  sug- 
gests, that  the  numerous  workmen  mentioned  were  not  em- 
ployed in  building  the  temple  alone,  but  all  the  public  buildings ; 
the  temple  being  made  the  pretext  for  forced  labor. 

The  temple  itself  was  not  an  extensive  structure;  the  prin- 
cipal building  ran  seventy  cubits  (one  hundred  and  twenty-two 
and  a  half  feet)  in  the  clear  from  east  to  west,  as  all  other 
ancient  temples  did,  and  twenty  cubits  (thirty-five  feet)  in 
breadth  from  north  to  south;  which  was  divided  into  three 
apartments;  at  the  eastern  end  was  a  porch  or  ante-chapel, 
which  occupied  ten  cubits  of  the  entire  length,  called  in  Scrip- 


372  PERIOD    III. 

ture,  ulam.  The  main  department,  or  hechal,  ran  forty  cubits 
in  clear,  and,  consequently,  was  forty  by  twenty;  after  which 
came  the  most  holy,  or  sacred  shrine,  entirely  on  the  plan  of 
the  Mosaic  tabernacle.  The  height  of  the  first  two  departments 
was  thirty  cubits,  and  of  the  debir,  or  the  most  holy,  was 
twenty  cubits,  which  was  also  its  length  and  its  breadth. 
Around  the  three  sides  of  the  temples  ran  a  piazza  supported 
by  columns,  which  was  five  cubits  broad  at  the  base,  and  to 
which  a  door  opened  at  the  south  side  of  the  main  building ; 
at  the  height  of  ten  cubits,  to  which  a  flight  of  winding  steps 
led,  the  breadth  of  the  piazza  increased  one  cubit  each  story, 
as  the  diameter  of  the  wall  decreased,  which  was  also  the  case 
at  the  highest  story,  so  that  the  piazza  was  five,  six  and  seven 
cubits  broad.  The  whole  piazza  rested  on  columns  of  cedar 
wood,  and  was  surrounded  with  light  wood  work  of  the  same 
kind.  The  main  building  was  of  square  stones  with  glass 
windows,  which  was  then  quite  a  novelty,  even  among  the 
Phoenicians.  Inside,  the  walls  were  covered  with  wood  work 
of  cedars,  and  the  floor  was  covered  with  timber  of  cypress 
wood;  all  of  which  was  carved  in  an  artistical  manner,  and 
covered  with  mosaic  works,  resembling  blossoms  and  berries. 
The  same  kind  of  cedar  partition  separated  the  sanctuary  from 
the  most  holy,  which  was  covered  with  gold  plates,  and  orna- 
mented at  the  top  with  gold  chains.  Two  cherubims  of  olive 
wood  ten  cubits  high  and  ten  cubits  for  the  span  of  the  wings, 
were  placed  at  the  extreme  west  side  of  the  most  holy,  and 
covered  with  gold,  under  the  wings  of  which  was  placed  a 
postament  in  the  form  of  an  altar  covered  with  gold,  upon 
which  the  ark  should  rest.  The  floor  also  was  ornamented 
with  gold  blossoms,  berries,  cherubims,  and  other  figures ;  so 
was  the  partition  separating  the  sanctuary  from  the  most  holy. 
The  door  between  the  most  holy  and  the  sanctuary  represented 
a  pentagon  consisting  of  two  wings,  made  of  olive  wood  highly 
ornamented  with  golden  mosaic.  The  door  of  the  sanctuary 
was  made  of  two  wings  of  cypress  wood,  and  ornamented  in 
the  same  manner.  The  whole  building  was  surrounded  by  a 
structure  of  square  stones  on  three  sides,  and  a  trellis  of  cedar 


CHAPTER   IX.  373 

wood  on  the  east  side,  which  made  the  enclosure  of  the  temple 
square,  the  size  of  which  is  unknown,  containing  the  halls  of 
the  priests,  and  other  halls,  called  the  hall  of  the  Israelites,  the 
hall  of  women,  the  public  treasury,  the  departments  of  the 
temple  officers,  the  session  rooms  of  the  national  council  and 
the  courts  of  justice.  The  temple  itself  appears  to  have  stood 
on  higher  ground  than  the  surrounding  buildings,  and  was  it- 
self higher,  so  that  it  could  be  seen  from  all  parts  of  Jerusalem. 
The  brass  work  of  the  temple  consisted  chiefly  of  two 
highly  ornamented  pillars  placed  within  the  ante-chapel,  called 
Jachin  and  Boaz;  a  large  tank  of  brass,  supported  by  twelve 
oxen  of  brass;  ten  baths  of  brass  ornamented  with  figures 
of  lions,  oxen  and  cherubims,  and  resting  npon  four  wheels 
each,  besides  other  utensils  and  vessels.  The  artist  in 
this  branch  was  Hyram,  the  son  of  a  Tyrian  and  a  woman 
from  Naphthali,  who  made  his  master-pieces  in  the  plain 
of  Jordan  in  earthen  forms,  somewhere  between  Succoh 
and  Zarthan.  The  principal  golden  works  were  ten  golden 
lamps  and  gold-covered  tables — as  one  of  each  stood  in  the 
Mosaic  tabernacle — besides  other  utensils  and  vessels.  No 
mention  is  made  of  new  altars  in  Kings;  Chronicles  informs 
us  that  a  new  altar  was  made.  The  large  bath  stood  outside 
the  temple,  the  ten  small  ones  were  on  the  opposite  sides  of 
the  porch,  between  which  stood  the  brass  altar.  The  ten 
golden  lamps  and  tables  stood  on  the  two  opposite  sides  of 
the  sanctuary,  amidst  which  was  placed  the  golden  altar;  the 
most  holy  contained  but  the  ark  and  other  sacred  relics,  as  the 
pot  of  manna,  the  rod  of  Aaron,  the  book  of  the  law,  &c.  In 
the  main,  the  temple  of  Solomon  was  built  on  the  plan  of  the 
Mosaic  tabernacle;  the  figures  of  cherubim,  blossoms,  fruits, 
&c,  already  existed  in  the  Mosaic  sanctuary;  the  figures  of 
animals,  as  of  the  ox,  the  lion,  and  the  wheels  were  new.  As 
Moses  had  taken  Egyptian  figures  to  enliven  the  fancy  of  the 
worshiper,  so  Solomon  made  use  of  the  most  sacred  figures  of 
the  Zabians;  the  ox,  the  ground  of  creation  and  its  beginning, 
the  wheel,  the  line  without  end,  the  orbit  of  the  stars,  the 
number  ten,   an  expression  for  every  thing   that  is  pure  and 


374  PERIOD    III. 

perfect,  and  the  pentagon,  the  most  sacred  hieroglyphic  of  the 
Zabians,  were  the  principal  figures.  Solomon  like  Moses  made 
use  of  the  prevalent  ideas  of  his  age  to  captivate  the  attention, 
enliven  the  fancy  and  direct  the  mind  to  the  throne  of  Jehovah. 
It  appears  from  I  Kings  (vi.  11-13),  that  dissatisfaction 
prevailed  among  the  people  during  the  process  of  building  the 
temple  and  other  structures;  heavy  taxes  and  forced  labor  may 
have  been  the  cause ;  still  Solomon  was  encouraged  by  God, 
who  most  likely  revealed  his  will  through  the  national  council, 
to  continue  the  sacred  work,  which  was  finished  in  the  eleventh 
year  of  Solomon's  reign  and  in  the  eight  month  of  that  year 
(Tishri  997  b.  a),  when  Solomon  convoked  the  national 
council  to  dedicate  the  temple.  The  people  from  all  parts  of 
the  land,  and  as  the  passage  in  Solomon's  prayer  indicates  (I 
Kings  viii,  41-43)  slao  numerous  foreigners,  flocked  to  Jerusalem 
witness  the  grand  fete.  The  first  day  of  the  feast  of  booths 
was  fixed  for  the  commencement  of  the  dedication  festival. 
The  priests,  accompanied  by  the  choruses  and  the  guards  of  the 
Levites,  opened  the  grand  procession,  removing  the  ark  of 
the  covenant  from  Zion  to  the  temple,  which  was  followed  by 
the  king  and  his  suite,  the  national  council,  and  a  large  con- 
course of  people.  The  ark  was  brought  into  the  most  holy 
and  received  with  the  song  and  music  of  the  Levites,  numerous 
sacrifices,  and  hymns  of  the  king  and  the  people.  After  divine 
service  Solomon  recited  an  elaborate  and  appropriate  prayer, 
after  which  he  addressed  the  people  in  short  and  impressive 
terms.  The  president  of  the  senate  responded  to  the  king's 
address,*  assuring  him  that  God  had  listened  to  his  prayers 
and  granted  his  request;  that  this  house  was  sacred,  over 
which  God  would  continually  watch,  and  that  the  king  also 
would  enjoy  the  protection  of  the  Lord,  and  his  descendants 
sit  safely  on  his  throne,  if  he  and  they  would  continue  to  re- 
spect the  law  of  God.  and  administer  it  in  uprightness  and 
sincerity.  But  that  this  house  would  be  destroyed,  his  throne 
overturned,  and  Israel  fall  into  the  hands  of  their  enemies,  if 
he    or  his  descendants   should  desert  the  law.     The  feast   of 

*  Compare  I  Kings  ixt  2-9  with  II  Chronicles  vii,  12-22. 


CHAPTER    IX.  375 

dedication  lasted  fourteen  days,  at  the  end  of  which  the  king 
again  addressed  and  blessed  the  people,  who  left  Jerusalem 
highly  gratified  with  the  splendor  and  glory  of  the  capital,  the 
king,  and  the  national  sanctuary.  The  Mosaic  tabernacle  was 
deposited  in  the  temple,  the  vessels  and  utensils  also  were 
used  there,  and  so  the  sanctity  of  the  edifice  was  doubted  no 
longer,  and  the  purpose  of  Solomon  and  David  was  reached,  in 
making  Jerusalem  to  be  the  center  of  the  nation. 

As  regards  the  unusual  pomp  and  luxury  of  Solomon, 
which,  as  we  remarked  before,  was  calculated  to  attract  for- 
eigners to  the  capital  and  exercise  a  moral  influence  upon  them, 
first  must  be  mentioned  the  numerous  structures  with  which  he 
enriched  the  capital  and  its  vicinity,  to  which  belong  his  own 
palace,  his  queen's  palace,  his  piazza,  his  porch  of  judgment, 
and  his  house  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon,  so  called  from  the  nu- 
merous columns  of  cedars,  which  was  the  royal  arsenal;  all  of 
them  were  finished  in  the  twentieth  year  of  his  reign.  What- 
ever wealth  and  art  could  afford  at  that  time  was  exhausted  in 
those  structures;  his  throne  of  ivory,  the  golden  shields  of  his 
guards,  the  splendor  of  his  court,  as  admired  by  the  queen  of 
Sheba,  and  the  large  presents  which  he 'gave  to  Hyram  testify 
for  themselves.  The  splendor  of  an  eastern  court  is  only  com- 
plete when  amidst  wealth  and  luxury  the  greatest  female 
beauties  are  found;  in  this  point  Solomon  excelled  all  other 
monarchs.  Seven  hundred  wives  and  three  hundred  concu- 
bines, the  select  beauties  of  all  neighboring  nations  and  of 
Israel,  shared  the  love  of  Solomon  with  his  queen,  the  daugh- 
ter of  Pharaoh.  Solomon  indeed  succeeded  in  attracting 
numerous  strangers  to  Jerusalem,  among  which  was  also  the 
queen  of  Sheba,  a  south-eastern  province  of  Arabia,  who  had 
heard  of  the  brilliancy  of  Solomon's  wit,  and  of  the  splendor 
of  his  court.  She  came  with  the  intention  of  satisfying  herself 
as  to  the  fame  of  Solomon ;  she  found  Solomon  and  his  court 
worthy  of  the  fame  bostowed  on  them,  and  she  freely  expressed 
her  admiration.  She  made  large  presents  to  the  king  in  gold, 
spices  and  precious  stones,  for  wbich  she  also  received  rich 
presents  in  return. 


376  PERIOD     III. 

This  anecdote  as  unimportant  as  it  is  in  itself,  still  shows, 
that  Solomon  succeeded  in  his  attempts  to  make  Jerusalem  an 
attractive  center  not  only  to  the  Israelites,  but  also  to  other 
nations. 

If  the  foregoing  facts  are  well  considered,  it  will  be  seen, 
that  an  increase  of  commerce  came  by  itself.  The  connection 
of  the  Israelites  with  Phoenicians,  Egyptians,  and  especially 
Tyrians,  improved  the  industry  of  the  nation.  The  luxury  of 
the  court  reacted,  also,  on  the  people,  and  the  consumption  of 
foreign  goods  and  products,  must  have  increased  annually. 
The  straight  and  safe  road  between  Egypt,  Phoenicia,  and  the 
Euphrates,  made  Palestine  the  commercial  center  of  those 
countries;  and  the  concourse  of  strangers  in  Jerusalem,  as 
well  as  the  numerous  and  continually  increasing  population, 
wealth,  and  luxury  of  that  city,  had  a  like  influence,  also,  on 
this  inland  emporium.  Solomon  favored  this  state  of  things 
by  entering  into  a  closer  connection  with  the  maritime  enter- 
prises of  Hyram.  The  Israelites  were  unacquainted  with  ship 
construction  and  navigation,  wherefore  a  commercial  fleet  was 
constructed,  most  likely  in  Joppa,  which,  manned  by  Tyrians 
and  Israelites,  went  to  Tarshish,  which  was  probably  the 
name  for  all  the  known  coasts  of  Africa  and  Europe,  because 
ships  sailed  to  Tarshish  from  Joppa  and  Eziongaber.  They 
returned  once  every  three  years,  loaded  with  gold,  silver,  ele- 
phants, apes,  parrots,  and  other  articles  of  foreign  countries. 
The  time  taken  in  performing  the  voyage,  and  the  articles  which 
they  brought  justify  the  opinion,  that  Tarshish  was  not  a 
country  of  either  Europe  or  Africa.  That  those  ships  must  have 
touched  upon  Spain  is  a  matter  of  course ;  that  the  Phoenicians 
had  settlements  in  Spain,  and  traded  with  the  aborigines  of 
that  country,  is  pretty  well  established,  but  that  Israelitish 
colonists  settled  in  that  country  in  the  time  of  Solomon,  that 
a  letter  to  this  effect  is  still  in  existence,  requires  a  more  solid 
historical  foundation.  This  much  is  sure,  that  the  Israelites 
took  an  active  part  in  the  Mediterranean  trade,  which  poured 
additional  wealth,  not  only  into  the  coffers  of  the  king,  but 
also  into  the  nation. 


CHAPTER    IX.  377 

A  difficulty  had  arisen  between  Solomon  and  Hyram,  which, 
however,  was  amicably  settled.  After  Solomon  had  done  with 
his  private  and  public  buildings,  he  ceded  to  Hyram  twenty 
cities  of  Galilee,  as  a  compensation  for  the  assistance  received 
of  Hyram,  in  materials,  as  well  as  artists.  These  cities  ap- 
pear to  have  been  in  the  extreme  north  of  Palestine,  not 
inhabited  by  the  Israelites,  and  not  belonging  to  the  land 
proper.  But  Hyram  was  dissatisfied  with  so  meagre  a  com- 
pensation, wherefore  he  called  the  district  the  land  of  Chabul 
(of  disgust),  and  he  refused  to  occupy  it.  Solomon  gave  to 
Hyram  the  immense  sum  of  one  hundred  and  twenty  talents  of 
gold,  and  opened  the  district  to  Israelitish  occupants. 

Solomon  did  not  rest  satisfied  with  his  Mediterranean  trade, 
he  was  desirous  to  have  communications  also  with  those  eastern 
nations,  which  were  beyond  his  reach  by  his  eastern  landroad; 
he  went  down  to  the  Elanic  gulf  of  the  Red  sea,  in  Idumea, 
and  finding  the  old  head-quarters  of  Moses,  Eziongaber  or 
Berenice,  a  suitable  spot,  he  turned  it  into  a  sea  port,  from 
which  ships,  manned  by  Tyrians  and  Israelites,  were  dis- 
patched to  Ophir,  which  according  to  all  probabilities,  was 
India,  and  was  to  the  land  and  to  the  king  an  immense  source 
of  wealth.  Caravans  now  crossed  the  desert  in  all  directions ; 
shippers  and  merchants  were  busily  engaged  to  supply  the 
markets  of  the  different  cities  and  countries,  and  the  attention 
of  the  people  was  directed  towards  commerce  and  luxury. 
The  precious  almug  wood  was  so  plenty,  that  the  stairs  and 
pillars  of  the  temple  and  of  the  king's  palace,  as  well  as  the 
harps  of  the  king's  musicians  were  made  of  that  wood ;  precious 
metals,  stones  and  wood,  were  in  superabundance  in  the  land; 
the  kings  of  Arabia,  the  pashas  and  kings  of  Syria,  paid  tri- 
bute to  Solomon,  and  most  likely  the  Israelites  monopolized 
the  trade  of  those  countries. 

Notwithstanding  the  illegal  means  of  Solomon,  it  must  be 
confessed,  that  he  succeeded. in  raising  his  nation  to  the  high- 
est pinnacle  of  national  prosperity,  according  to  our  modern 
conception  of  that  term.  On  the  other  side  it  can  not  be 
denied,  that  he   totally  departed  from  the  Mosaic  policy ;  his 


378  PERIOD  III. 

immense  wealth,  his  importation  of  horses  from  Egypt — 
the  horse  trade  is  mentioned  as  an  extensive  branch  of  busi- 
ness— and  his  magnificent  harem  and  pompous  court,  were  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  law  of  Moses.  The  extensive  com- 
merce, the  accumulation  of  wealth,  and  the  maintenance  of 
such  a  large  army,  was  an  entire  breach  of  the  Mosaic  policy. 
But  new  circumstances  make  a  new  policy  necessary.  Moses 
legislated  for  a  nation  of  simple  peasants,  and  his  policy  was 
suited  to  the  state  of  things,  as  it  then  was.  Solomon  inherited 
a  vast  empire,  in  which  heterogeneous  interests  and  multifarious 
exigencies  had  to  be  considered.  He  lived  in  an  age  of  enlight- 
enment, learning,  and  advanced  civilization,  wherefore  a  change 
of  policy  might  be  excusable,  if  the  new  course  had  been 
chosen  with  discretion,  and  had  been  judiciously  pursued. 
Solomon  not  only  discarded  the  Mosaic  policy,  but  he  also 
revolted  against  the  Mosaic  religion,  to  maintain  which,  his 
predecessors  had  taken  the  greatest  pains,  and  which  was  the 
safest  bond  of  union  to  the  nation.  This  was  an  attack  upon 
the  root  of  the  national  strength,  downright  high  treason,  a 
total  neglect  of  the  constitution,  and  a  threatening  danger  to 
Israel's  future.  The  law  of  Israel  was  closely  connected  with 
its  religion.  It  was  guarded  by  the  barrier  of  religious  sanc- 
tity which  surrounded  it;  if  this  barrier  was  once  broken 
through — and  the  worship  of  foreign  gods  was  the  very  act  of 
breaking  through  that  barrier — then  no  guaranty  whatever 
was  left  to  the  people  against  the  despotic  will  of  one  ruler. 
Solomon,  in  order  to  please  his  foreign  wives,  and  probably 
also  to  please  the  strangers  coming  to  Jerusalem,  reared  tem- 
ples and  altars  to  foreign  gods,  on  the  hills  around  Jerusalem. 
The  same  king  who  had  built  the  temple  of  Jehovah,  brought 
sacrifices  to  Chemosh  and  Moloch;  he,  who  pretended  to  have 
been  gifted  with  divine  wisdom,  was  weak  enough  to  yield  to 
the  sensual  charms  of  Astarte  worship.  This  stirred  up  at 
once  the  most  influencial  class  of  society,  the  prophets,  the 
Levites,  and  the  priests.  A  message  was  sent  to  him,  most 
likely  by  the  senate,  telling  him  in  plain  terms,  that  he  was 
guilty  of  high  treason  against  the  nation,  and  that  there  was 


CHAPTER     IX.  379 

such  a  general  dissatisfaction  in  Israel,  that  all  the  tribes, 
except  Jehudali,  would  refuse  allegiance  to  the  dynasty;  and 
Jehudah's  fidelity  must  be  ascribed  to  the  respect  entertained 
for  the  chivalrous  David.  This  mission  was  brought  to  the 
king  by  the  prophet  Iddo  (II  Chron.  ix,  29).  The  last  part  of 
this  message  suggests  the  idea,  that  Solomon,  according  to 
ancient  custom,  desired  the  consent  of  the  senate  to  his  ap- 
pointed successor,  which  was  refused  by  all,  except  the  senators 
of  Jehudali.  But  that  severe  message  did  not  effect  the  king, 
who  had  given  himself  up  to  all  the  sensual  pleasures  connected 
with  the  worship  of  the  beforementioned  gods.  Another 
occurrence  calculated  to  increase  the  agitation,  took  place 
about  the  same  time.  Rezon,  a  son  of  Eliada,  whose  father 
was  a  captain  of  a  squadron,  in  the  same  army  of  Hadarezer 
which  David  defeated  before  he  went  to  Damascus,  succeeded 
in  collecting  a  band  of  armed  men,  and  favored  by  the  feeble- 
ness of  Solomon,  he  laid  great  obstacles  into  the  way  of  the 
eastern  trade,  most  likely  robbing  the  caravans  and  making  the 
road  unsafe,  so  that  one  of  the  principle  sources  of  the  wealth 
of  Jerusalem  was  cut  off.  Solomon  had  not  the  energies  to 
crush  that  threatening  revolt  in  its  infancy,  and  it  grew  more 
formidable  from  year  to  year,  finally  resulting  not  only  in  the 
loss  of  his  valuable  Syrian  [possessions,  but  in  creating  a  pow- 
erful and  irreconcilable  enemy  to  Israel,  which,  however,  did 
not  occur  until  after  his  death. 

The  same  check,  although  not  to  such  an  extent,  was  put 
upon  the  southern  trade.  An  Idumean  prince,  when  quite 
young,  escaped  from  the  hands  of  Joab,  and  found  shelter  in 
the  royal  court  of  Pharaoh,  where  he  afterwards  married  the 
queen's  sister.  The  king  of  Egypt  had  several  reasons  for 
opposing  the  progress  of  Palestine,  which  was  now  a  powerful 
rival  in  the  Arabian  gulf  and  the  Indian  sea,  where,  as  the 
similarity  of  Indian  and  Egyptian  institutes,  superstitions, 
public  buildings,  and  peculiar  notions  sufficiently  demonstrate, 
Egypt  had  anciently  a  considerable  traffic,  and  most  likely 
opened  that  highway  of  commerce.  If  the  communication 
between  Eziongaber  and  Jerusalem  was  interrupted,  the  Ophir 


380  PERIOD   III. 

commerce  was  at  an  end.  Besides  this,  it  appears  that  Pha- 
raoh hoped  to  see  a  son  of  his  daughter  upon  the  throne  of 
Israel,  in  which  he  was  disappointed,  as  the  king  nominated 
his  oldest  son,  Rehoboam,  to  succeed,  who  must  have  been 
born  before  Solomon  married  the  Egyptian  princess,  as  this 
marriage  was  contracted  during  the  reign  of  Solomon, 
who  reigned  forty  years.  Rehoboam  was  forty-one  years 
old,  at  the  demise  of  his  father.  In  addition  to  this,  Solomon 
may  have  neglected  the  Egyptian  princess,  yielding  to  the 
unchaste  worship  of  Astarte.  Either  one  or  all  of  those  causes 
altered  the  policy  of  Pharaoh  towards  Solomon,  and  he  gave 
permission  to  Hadad,  the  Idumean  prince,  to  return  to  his  own 
land,  who,  most  likely  by  the  secret  assistance  of  Egpyt,  suc- 
ceeded in  collecting  a  band  of  armed  men,  and  to  check  the 
communication  between  Jerusalem  and  Eziongaber,  which  was 
another  misfortune  for  the  trade  of  Jerusalem,  and  to  the 
king's  treasury.  Solomon  neither  met  the  Idumean  with 
promptitude,  nor  curtailed  the  insane  luxury  of  his  court,  and 
had  therefore  to  resort  to  a  heavy  taxation.  These  facts,  to- 
gether with  the  indignation  of  the  senate,  produced,  as  they 
naturally  must  have  done,  a  dangerous  insurrection  in  the 
capital,  which  was  headed  by  Jeroboam,  son  of  Nebat,  and 
sanctioned,  if  not  agitated,  by  the  prophet  Ahiah,  of  Shiloh, 
the  president  of  the  senate,  who  promised  to  Jerobeam  the 
allegiance  of  all  the  tribes  except  Jehudah,  provided  he  pro- 
mised obedience  to  the  laws  of  the  land  and  longed  not  for  a 
hereditary  throne.  This  promise  was  not  given  of  his  own  ac- 
cord, but,  as  it  appears,  by  order  of  the  senate.  Jeroboam  was  the 
son  of  Nebat,  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  who  had  distinguished 
himself  in  the  service  of  the  king,  and  was  therefore  promoted 
to  higher  offices.  The  insurrection  was  quelled,  Jeroboam 
escaped  to  Egypt,  and  was  hospitably  entertained  by  Shishak, 
most  likely  the  son  of  the  Pharaoh  who  died  shortly  before. 
Solomon  was  now  entrapped  by  the  hostile  Egypt,  the  progress- 
ing revolutionists  of  Syria,  and  the  agitated  Edom,  while  at 
home  a  hostile  feeling  against  his  government  manifested  itself 
every  way,     No  doubt  he  dissolved  the  senate,  and  took  active 


CHAPTER    IX.  381 

measures  against  Hadad,  in  Edom,  but  he  had  outlived  his 
popularity ;  his  energies  were  exhausted  in  the  intoxication  of 
luxury  and  sensuality;  his  policy  had  proved  a  failure,  and  in 
the  midst  of  this  confusion  he  died  not  above  the  age  of  sixty, 
leaving  to  his  son  an  agitated  nation,  surrounded  by  threaten- 
ing enemies.  Solomon  was  undoubtedly  the  greatest  and 
smallest  man  of  our  history;  his  wisdom  only  served  to  shake 
the  Israelitish  commonwealth  to  its  very  foundation.  He  died 
968,  b.  c,  and  was  buried  in  Zion. 

The  national  council  was  convoked  at  Shechem,  to  order  the 
succession  to  the  throne,  and  it  was  concluded  upon  maintain- 
ing the  Davidian  dynasty,  on  condition  that  the  successor  of 
Solomon  alter  his  policy,  and  release  them  from  forced  labor 
and  excessive  taxes,  two  things  which  were  felt  most  severely 
among  the  mass  of  the  people.  The  proposition  of  the  na- 
tional council  was  moderate  and  fair ;  they  seem  to  have  been 
eager  to  maintain  the  union,  and  to  guard  against  violent 
eruptions,  and  Rehoboam  could  have  honorably  accepted  these 
terms,  nay,  if  prudent  he  must  have  accepted  them.  The 
prince  demanded  a  respite  of  three  days,  in  order  to  reflect  on 
the  conditions.  Old  and  experienced  statesman  advised  the 
prince  to  yield  to  the  demands  of  the  nation,  as  there  was  no 
right  in  favor  of  the  king  to  reject  the  moderate  propositions 
made  to  him,  and  as  they  said,  "  If  thou  wilt  be  a  servant  unto 
this  people  this  day,  and  will  serve  them,  and  answer  them, 
and  speak  good  words  to  them,  then  they  will  be  thy  servants 
forever."  The  prince  also  asked  the  advice  of  his  juvenile 
friends,  who  had  been  brought  up  with  him,  under  the  intoxicat- 
ing influence  of  an  insane  luxury,  sensual  pleasures,  and  wild 
enjoyments,  accustomed  to  look  upon  the  people  as  the  mere 
instruments  wherewith  to  bring  about  the  means  of  indulging 
in  all  sensual  pleasures,  as  a  host  of  creatures  subservient  to 
the  cause  of  the  dynasty,  which  is  the  center  of  existence. 
The  question  was  now,  whether  or  not  the  nation  should  have 
the  right  to  restrict  the  extravagance  of  the  court,  and  to 
direct  the  public  actions  of  the  king,  which,  of  course,  the  ju- 
venile friends  Of  the  prince  answered  in  the  negative,   advising 


382  PERIOD    III. 

him  to  intimidate  the  national  council  by  menaces.  The  sequel 
proves  how  very  little  they  understood  the  character  of  a  nation 
apprized  of  an  injustice  which  they  are  not  bound  to  suffer. 
Rehoboam,  as  he  naturally  must  have  done  from  his  own  point 
of  view,  preferred  the  advice  of  his  juvenile  friends,  and  after 
the  elapse  of  the  respite,  he  answered  the  national  council: 
"My  father  made  your  yoke  heavy,  and  I  will  add  to  your 
yoke;  my  father  chastised  you  with  whips,  but  I  will  chastise 
you  with  scorpions." 

Every  reader  must  feel  how  mean  this  arbitrary  answer 
sounds,  if  contrasted  with  the  humble  and  just  requests  of  the 
national  council;  it  was  calculated  to  stir  up  the  calmest 
mind,  to  heighten  the  excitement  to  uncontrollable  violence. 
Protracted  debates  ensued,  all  means  of  persuasion  were  tried 
in  vain  with  the  prince,  he  insisted  upon  the  arbitrary  policy; 
the  excitement  and  the  indignation  increased  daily,  the  prophet 
Ahiah,  also,  may  have  contributed  his  share  in  behalf  of  his 
favorite  Jeroboam,  in  whom  he  thought  he  detected  another 
David;  at  last,  the  national  council  formally  and  legally  deposed 
the  Davidian  dynasty,  after  which  it  adjourned  its  sessions. 
The  representatives  of  Jehudah  and  Benjamin  confirmed,  with- 
out a  particle  of  right,  the  claims  of  Rehoboam,  most  likely 
entertaining  the  hope  that  the  other  tribes  would  yield,  as  they 
had  done  in  the  time  of  David;  but  when  the  king's  collector  of 
taxes  tried  to  discharge  his  duties  in  the  name  of  Rehoboam,  the 
people  of  Shechem  stoned  him  to  death,  and  Rehoboam  himself 
narrowly  escaped  the  same  fate.  Having  returned  to  Jerusalem 
he  collected  his  military  force,  consisting  of  one  hundred  and 
eighty  thousand  men,  to  enforce  his  authority  upon  the  revolt- 
ing tribes.  But  this  time  it  was  not  the  ten  tribes  who  revolted; 
they  stood  upon  the  firm  ground  of  the  law.  The  national 
council,  the  supreme  authority  which  the  law  of  Israel  sanc- 
tioned, had  justly  and  legally  deposed  the  Davidian  dynasty. 
It  was  Jehudah  and  Benjamin  who  were  the  revolting  party, 
they  supported  an  usurper  on  account  of  private  interests, 
because  they  had  the  capital  of  that  dynasty  in  their  midst. 
Therefore,  the  prophet  Shemaiah  argued  the  cause  in  favor  of 


CHAPTER    VIII.  383 

the  ten  tribes,  and  succeeded  in  preventing  civil  war.  This 
Shemaiah  appears  to  have  been  the  successor  in  office  of 
Ahiah,  who  was  deposed  by  Solomon.  Meanwhile,  Jeroboam 
informed  of  the  state  of  affairs,  had  returned  from  Egypt;  the 
national  council  assembled  again  in  Shechem,  and  Jeroboam 
was  duly  elected  king  of  Israel.  Had  Jehudah  and  Benjamin 
yielded  to  the  will  of  the  majority,  as  they  ought  to  have  done, 
the  history  of  Israel  would  have  taken  another  and  more  fa- 
vorable course ;  but  the  violence  of  Jehudah  dissolved  the  union 
and  forced  the  kings  of  Israel  to  a  schism  in  religion. 

One  century  had  scarcely  elapsed  since  Samuel  told  them, 
"And  ye  shall  cry  out  in  that  day  because  of  your  king  which 
ye  shall  have  chosen  you,  and  the  Lord  will  not  hear  you  on 
that  day."  Civil  wars,  revolutions,  foreign  wars,  and  ojjpres- 
sion  at  home,  overbalanced  by  far  the  national  prosperity 
enjoyed  under  the  three  kings.  The  progress  achieved  during 
this  period  was  a  natural  consequence  of  the  development  of 
the  national  resources,  of  the  Mosaic  law,  and  the  school  of 
Samuel.  This  period  of  greatness  was  sure  to  come.  If  Saul, 
David  and  Solomon  had  been  judges,  as  were  Samuel  and  Eli, 
— and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  other  men  of  the  same,  if  not 
higher  talents,  existed  simultaneously  with  the  former — the 
same  progress  would  have  been  achieved;  while  the  massacre 
of  thousands  of  Israelites  would  have  been  prevented,  and  the 
interests  of  the  nation  would  not  have  been  sacrificed  in  favor 
of  a  dynasty.  A  king  is  a  man  who  dies ;  a  republic  is  an 
immortal  party.  The  former  advances  the  interests  of  the 
nation  if  they  come  not  in  collision  with  his  interests  or  those 
of  his  descendants ;  a  republic  takes  care  of  itself.  The  down- 
fall of  Israel  must  be  dated,  if  not  from  the  date  of  Saul's 
elevation  to  the  throne,  or  David's  success  in  securing  to  his 
family  hereditary  claims  on  the  crown — from  the  revolt  of 
Jehudah  and  Benjamin  against  the  will  of  the  majority.  The 
people  and  the  prophets  understood  the  national  disease,  and 
proposed  a  radical  cure  by  changing  again  the  supreme  autho- 
rity into  an  elective  monarchy.  But  Jehudah  and  Benjamin 
pposed  that  salutary  reform,  and  the  consequences  were  the 


384  APPENDIX    TO 

dissolution  of  the  union  of  Israel,  which  had  lasted  five  cen- 
turies. The  union  cemented  by  Moses,  strengthened  by- 
Samuel,  and  completed  by  David,  was  destroyed  by  the  folly 
of  Eehoboam,  and  the  obstinacy  of  Jehudah. 


APPENDIX  TO   PERIOD  III 


I.  THE   PEOPLE  AND  THE  COUNTRY. 

All  the  energies  of  the  Israelites,  as  a  people,  and  all  the 
wealth  of  the  fertile  Palestine  were  developed  during  this 
period.  While  already  in  the  time  of  Saul,  the  southern  and 
south-eastern  enemies  of  Israel — Ammon,  Moab,  Amalek  and 
others  pressed  into  the  desert  by  the  Israelites — were  severely 
chastised  by  the  Israelitish  warriors,  David  not  only  took  ample 
revenge  on  all  the  surrounding  nations  for  the  wrongs  inflicted 
upon  the  Israelites  during  the  preceding  centuries,  breaking  the 
power  of  the  Phelistines,  of  Edom,  Ammon,  Moab,  and  of 
the  other  tribes  of  the  desert,  but  he  also  defeated  the  victorious 
armies  of  Haderezer,  before  which  Syria  trembled.  Israel  ruled 
on  the  Euphrates;  the  utmost  power  which  Moses  imagined 
for  the  future  of  Israel;  and  Solomon  discomfited  forever  the 
hostile  aborigines. 

The  military  glory  of  the  Israelites  was  so  honorably  ac- 
knowledged, that  Solomon  notwithstanding  his  admiration  of 
every  thing  that  was  foreign,  employed  no  foreign  warriors 
(II  Chronicles  viii,  9). 

The  treaty  with  Egypt,  the  visit  of  the  queen  of  Sheba,  at 
Jerusalem,   and  the  frequently  mentioned  fact,  that  the  kings 


PERIOD    III.     |  385 

of  Arabia  and  of  Syria,  beyond  the  river,  brought  presents  to 
Solomon,  demonstrate  that  Israel  was  acknowledged  a  first  rate 
power,  whose  friendship  was  thought  valuable. 

The  numerous  and  costly  buildings  of  Solomon,  his  immense 
luxury,  and  the  large  standing  army,  together  with  the  expenses 
of  the  temple,  the  priesthood,  the  Levites,  and  scholastic  oilier  is, 
together  with  the  silence  of  the  people  about  heavy  taxes  until 
after  the  demise  of  Solomon,  and  the  large  commercial  connec- 
tions with  transmarine  nations,  convince  us,  that  a  general 
opulence  must  have  been  enjoyed  by  the  Israelites,  which  fa- 
vorably compared  with  Tyre,  Carthage  and  Alexandria  in  the 
days  of  their  glory. 

The  flourishing  state  of  the  literature  of  this  period,  of  which 
we  shall  treat  under  another  head,  the  accomplishments  in 
music  and  poetry  of  that  age ;  the  politeness  and  even  courtesy 
distinguishing  the  style  of  that  time,  in  every  literary  com- 
position that  has  reached  us ;  the  importance  attached  by  them 
to  learning  and  literary  endowments,  to  the  works  of  Tyrian 
art,  and  their  connections  with  the  most  civilized  nations  of 
that  time,  Egypt  and  Phoenicia,  who  laid  the  foundation  of  the 
civilization  of  the  west;  speak  highly  in  favor  of  the  Israelites, 
who  were  not  excelled  by  any  other  nation  of  antiquity.  Many 
of  the  psalms  and  of  the  proverbs  which  undoubtedly  originated 
with  the  contemporaries  of  David  and  Solomon,  and  the  songs 
of  Solomon,  are  of  themselves  sufficient  to  set  the  Israelites  of 
that  age  far  above  other  nations  of  their  time,  both  in  refinement, 
scholastic  endowments,  moral  wealth,  purity  and  correctness  of 
conception.  How  far  short  fall  the  literary  fragments  of  antiquity, 
the  Vedas,  Puranas,  and  Kings  included,  if  compared  with  the 
scriptures  of  the  Israelites  of  this  and  the  preceding  periods  ? 
Still,  considerable  pains  have  been  taken  to  deny  to  the  ancient 
Israelites  that  high  state  of  civilization  which  is  manifested  in 
their  scriptures. 

The    military  glory  acquired   in   so  many  battles    did  not 

prompt  the  Israelites  towage  wars  of  conquest,  nor  did  it  result 

in  a  military  despotism,   nor  in  a  disposition   to    anarchy  and 

self-rule — a  fact  well  worthy  of  an  especial  record,  because  it 

25 


386  APPENDIX    TO 

is  an  exception  to  the  general  rule  in  the  history  of  nations. 
Justice  and  equity  continued  to  be  highly  regarded,  so  that  the 
cause  of  Solomon's  popularity  for  wisdom  was  a  wise  judgment 
given  in  the  cause  of  the  two  harlots.  It  is  said  in  praise  of 
David,  "  And  David  did  justice  and  equity  to  all  his  people." 
David's  behavior  towards  Saul,  at  the  death  of  Saul,  of  Abner 
and  Ish  Bosheth,  show  a  profound  respect  for  justice.  The 
entire  secresy  under  which  he  endeavored  to  conceal  the  Bath- 
sheba  and  Uriah  affair,  the  subsequent  admonition  of  the  pro- 
phet and  the  revolutions,  are  no  mean  demonstration  of  a  ge- 
neral sentiment  of  justice  among  the  people,  and  decided  respect 
for  the  laws  of  the  land.  The  case  of  the  rich  man  who  robbed 
the  poor  of  the  only  sheep  he  possessed,  laid  before  David  by 
the  prophet  Nathan  (II  Samuel  xii);  the  case  of  the  wise  wo- 
man of  Thekoah  in  regard  to  her  son  who  killed  his  only 
brother,  who  therefore  was  in  the  hands  of  justice,  while  the 
mother  was  to  lose  her  last  son  (ibid  xiv);  and  the  judgment 
which  David  rendered  on  those  cases ;  the  facts  that  one  of  the 
means  used  by  Absalom  to  excite  the  indignation  of  the  people 
against  the  king,  was  the  assertion,  that  no  justice  would  be 
done  by  the  king  to  the  complaining  parties  (ibid  xiv,  2-4) ; 
that  also  two  women  of  ill  repute  could  reach  the  king  in  cases 
of  justice  and  demand  his  judgment  (I  Kings  iii,  16);  that  a 
recorder  was  appointed  at  the  royal  court  to  register  the 
grievances  brought  to  the  kiug;  and  that  Solomon  built  a  porch 
of  justice  attached  to  his  palace,  are  conclusive  evidences  that 
justice  and  equity  were  held  in  high  estimation  by  kings  and 
people.  The  massacre  of  the  priests  of  Nob,  and  the  execu- 
tion of  the  descendants  of  Saul  made  an  exception  to  the 
general  state  of  justice.  The  ancient  rabbins  justified  those 
transactions  by  an  existing  law. 

Wealth,  luxury,  an  extensive  commerce,  the  importation  of 
foreign  articles,  such  as  gold,  precious  stones  and  spices,  the 
love  of  justice  and  respect  for  the  law  protecting  the  feeble, 
generally  render  a  nation  effeminate  and  make  it  submissive 
to  the  despotic  will  of  the  ruler.  But  this  was  not  the  case 
in  Israel.     There  was  a  buoyancy  in  that  nation  which  the 


PERIOD    III.  387 

Mosaic  laws  and  institutions  must  have  naturally  produced. 
The  voice  of  the  people  was  so  much  feared  by  David  that  he 
covered  his  crime  committed  on  Uriah  and  Bathsheba  under  the 
veil  of  profound  secresy.  The  same  voice  of  the  people  makes 
itself  heard  on  a  number  of  occasions,  which  we  have  noticed 
before,  under  Absalom,  Sheba,  Jerobeam  and  other  occasions. 
Also  after  the  death  of  Solomon  the  native  buoyancy  of  the 
people  is  unimpaired,  notwithstanding  the  splendor  of  the  royal 
house,  of  the  capital  and  temple,  and  the  influence  of  the 
priests  and  Levites,  exercised  in  favor  of  the  Davidian  dynasty, 
as  they  uaturally  must  have  done,  and  did  do,  as  we  shall 
notice  hereafter;  and  notwithstanding  the  threatening  attitude 
of  Rehabeam,  the  voice  of  the  people  made  itself  powerfully- 
felt,  and  in  spite  of  these  adverse  circumstances  the  will  of  the 
people  proved  victorious. 

It  would  surprise  us  that  men  have  in  the  face  of  all  these 
fates,  denied  national  vigor  and  greatness  to  the  ancient  Israel- 
ites, were  we  not  aware  of  the  partiality  which  went  to  a  study 
of  their  history.  While  by  the  one  class  all  that  is  eminent 
and  great  was  ascribed  to  the  energies  of  one  or  two  great 
men  of  every  age,  who  received  their  eminence  directly  from 
God,  and  every  thing  mean  and  sinful  was  thrown  upon  the 
people  at  large,  standing  as  a  mere  zero  on  the  side  of  one  or 
two  inspired  men;  the  other  class,  suffering  under  the  delirium 
of  the  spirit  of  negation,  became  blind  to  every  thing  not.  suit- 
ing their  prejudiced  scheme  of  this  history.  To  these  came 
yet  a  third  class,  who,  misled  by  a  pseudo-liberality  and  hyper- 
criticism,  found  nothing  but  fault  and  trouble  in  the  whole 
course  of  history. 

Not  only  were  learning,  the  arts,  industry  and  commerce 
extensively  cultivated  during  this  period,  but  agriculture  and 
horticulture  had  also  reached  a  high  state  of  perfection, 
and  the  culture  of  live  stock,  especially  sheep,  employed  many 
a  husbandman.  Nabal  of  Carmel  had  three  thousand  sheep 
(I  Samuel,  xxv,  2).  Saul  superintended  the  estate  of  his 
father,  and  David  was  a  shepherd,  The  Amalekites  sent  away 
large  droves  of  live  stock  from  the  south  of  Jehudah  (I  Samuel  > 


388  APPENDIX    TO 

xxx).  David  had  appointed  seven  officers  to  manage  his  pri- 
vate estates  and  live  stock,  consisting  of  oxen,  camels,  asses 
and  sheep.  Joab  was  engaged  in  agriculture,  and  Absalom 
had  flocks  of  sheep  at  Baalhazor  in  Ephraim.  Threshing  floors 
and  wine  presses  are  mentioned  almost  every  where.  The 
large  consumption  of  live  stock,  flour,  wine,  olive  oil,  and 
spice  at  the  different  feasts,  which  we  noticed;  the  immense 
consumption  at  the  court  of  Solomon,  and  the  gifts  of  that 
king  to  Hvram  in  wheat,  wine  and  olive  oil,  notwithstanding 
the  large  population  of  Palestine  at  the  same  time,  are  calcu- 
lated to  impress  us  with  a  favorable  idea  of  the  then  state  of 
agriculture  and  breeding  of  live  stock,  which  was  an  employ- 
ment so  honorable,  that  the  king,  the  princes,  the  chief  offi- 
cers of  the  state,  were  engaged  in  it.  Camels  and  horses  were 
introduced  in  Palestine  during  this  period,  still  the  riding  on 
asses  continued.  It  appears,  that  camels  were  used  as  the 
means  of  conveyance  through  the  Syrian  plains  and  the  Idu- 
mean  deserts  only,  while  the  ass  and  the  mule  were  employed 
in  the  hilly  regions  of  Palestine;  and  horses  were  used  for 
military  and  luxurious  purposes  only.  The  ark  was  drawn  by 
oxen  because  the  ox  belongs  to  the  clean  animals. 

Feasting  on  solemn  and  secular  occasions,  besides  the  three 
national  feasts  (II  Chronicles  viii,  13),  especially  at  the  corona- 
tion of  the  king,  at  the  in-gathering  of  grapes,  the  shearing 
of  sheep,  and  on  other  occasions,  was  a  common  affair;  at 
which  meat,  cakes,  fruits  and  wine  were  the  principal  dain- 
ties. Different  kinds  of  cakes,  sauces  and  soups  are  mentioned 
in  our  sources. 

II.    THE  GOVERNMENT. 

It  is  evident  from  the  facts,  that  Samuel  wrote  a  constitution 
and  deposited  it  in  the  tabernacle  (I  Samuel  x,  25),  that  the 
national  council  is  continually  noticed  in  our  sources  and  still 
existed  after  the  death  of  Solomon,  that  every  king  asked  ad- 
vice of  the  Lord  in  different  affairs,  that  the  government  was  a 
constitutional  monarchy. 

The  king  elected  by  the  national  council  had  a  right,  based 


PERIOD    III.  389 

upon  ancient  custom,  dating  as  far  back  as  the  Patriarchs,  to 
nominate  his  successor  with  the  consent  of  the  national  coun- 
cil; as  Moses  did  with  Joshua  (Numbers  xxvii,  15-23),  as 
David  did  with  Solomon  (I  Chronicles  xxviii  and  xxix),  and  as 
Solomon  most  likely  did  with  Eehabeam.  The  king  had  a 
right  to  appoint  one  of  his  sons  to  succeed  him  (Dculr.  xvii, 
20),  as  it  is  clearly  indicated  in  the  words  of  Samuel  addressed 
to  Saul  (I  Samuel  xiii,  13),  and  in  the  words  of  Saul  ad- 
dressed to  Jonathan  (ibid  xx,  31);  while  the  republican  chief 
could  appoint  for  his  successor  a  man  of  another  tribe  only. 
David  succeeded  in  concentrating  the  claims  to  the  throne  in 
his  family,  so  that  none  but  one  of  the  Davidian  blood  could 
occupy  the  throne,  while  formerly  the  national  council  might 
reject  the  whole  royal  family,  if  cause  was  found  for  so  doing 
(II  Samuel  vii,  11-16,  26,  27),  which  was  afterwards  the  cause 
of  difficulties  between  Jehudah  and  Israel.  The  later  ex- 
pounders of  the  law  also  understood  it  in  this  way. 

The  public  ceremony  of  the  inauguration  of  the  king  con- 
sisted in  the  unction  or  anointment  with  sacred  oil  by  the 
prophet  or  the  high  priest,  wherefore  every  king  was  called 
Messiah  of  Jehovah,  anointed  to  represent  God  as  the  political 
head  of  the  nation.  He  was  subject  to  the  laws  of  the  land 
as  every  other  individual  was  (Deutr.  xvii,  19,  20),  and  liablo 
to  be  tried  and  punished  by  the  supreme  tribunal  of  justice,  as 
the  later  expounders  of  the  law  asserted,  and  as  it  appears 
clearly  from  the  following  passage:  II  Samuel  vii,  14,  15.  "  I 
will  bejris  (the  successor  of  David)  father,  and  he  shall  be  my 
son.  If  he  commit  iniquity,  I  will  chasten  him  with  the  rod 
of  man,  and  with  the  punishments  of  the  children  of  man; 
but  my  mercy  shall  not  depart  away  from  him,  as  I  took  it 
from  Saul,  whom  I  put  away  before  thee."  This  passage  and 
Psalm  lxxxix,  20-34  informs  us  clearly  enough  that  before  David 
the  law  must  have  been,  -that  a  king  can  be  removed  from 
office  for  misdemeanor;  but  a  monarch  of  the  Davidian  dynasty 
could  not  be  removed  from  office  for  misdemeanor.  He  could 
be  punished  even  with  corporeal  chastisement,  if  he  transgressed 
the  law.     §#11  it  appears  from  the  case  of  David,  when  he 


390  APPENDIX    TO 

stood  convicted  of  a  double  crime,  the  one  of  which  was  re- 
cognizable by  capital  punishment,  that  the  law  was  a  mere 
theory,  only  empowering  the  senate  to  set  it  in  force  if  circum- 
stances should  require  it.  The  prophet  Nathan  indeed  pro- 
nounced on  the  king  the  penalty  of  the  law :  but  at  the  same 
time  also  told  him,  that  the  senate  would  not  set  it  in  force  on 
account  of  David's  confession  and  repentance  (II  Samuel  xii, 
13).  In  the  case  of  Solomon  worshiping  idols,  which  the 
law  also  considered  a  capital  crime,  the  senate  suspended  the 
penalty  of  the  law;  but  they  considered  the  claims  of  the  Da- 
vidian  dynasty  to  the  throne  as  forfeited  (I  Kings  xi,  11); 
because  the  foundation  of  the  compact  between  the  people 
and  the  dynasty,  as  was  expressly  stated  to  Solomon  (ibid 
ix,  4,  5,),  was  violated  by  the  king  himself,  worshiping  Idols; 
he  had  actually  ceased  to  be  the  Messiah  of  Jehovah.  Still 
this  did  not  exclude  Rehabeam  from  the  right  to  be  among 
the  aspirants  to  the  throne.  Had  this  prince  been  elected  by 
the  national  council,  he  would  have  been  the  rightful  king; 
Solomon's  misdemeanor  annulled  the  dynastical  claims  only. 

The  king  was  the  commander-in-chief  of  the  army,  with 
which  office  he  could  commission  another  man,  as  Abner,  Joab, 
Amasa  and  Benaiah  were.  The  later  jurists  understood  the 
law  to  be  that  the  king  could  call  the  army  into  active  ser- 
vice to  repel  an  invasion,  or  to  quell  a  revolution;  but  in 
order  to  invade  a  foreign  country  the  consent  of  the  senate  had 
to  be  obtained.  Still  this  appears  not  so  from  our  sources. 
Saul  summoned  the  army  to  repel  Ammon  in  his  and  Samuel's 
name;  and  David  asked  advice  to  repel  the  Phelistines,  who 
had  advanced  as  far  as  the  plain  of  Rephaim.  It  appears 
therefore,  that  the  consent  of  the  senate  was  necessary  to 
every  war,  although  this  law  might  have  been  repealed  in  after 
ages.  Samuel  ordered  Saul  to  invade  the  territory  of  Amalek. 
The  invasion  of  Gath  by  David  was  but  the  continuation  of  a 
war  to  which  he  had  obtained  the  consent  of  the  senate.  No 
evidence  to  the  contrary  can  be  deduced  from  the  silence  of  our 
sources  on  the  other  warfares  of  David,  because  the  existence 
of  such  a  law  is  established  by  positive  evidence.     It  appears 


PERIOD    III.  391 

from  Psalm  ix,  8-10  and  Psalm  cviii,  8-10,  that  the  consent 
of  the  senate  was  obtained  to  the  invasion  of  Moab  and  Eclom. 
The  military  duties  of  the  people  have  been  mentioned  before. 

The  later  expounders  of  the  law  also  assert,  that  the  kings 
of  the  Davidian  dynasty  also  presided  over  the  senate;  but 
from  our  sources  it  appears,  that  this  prerogative  was  exercised 
only  in  cases  of  extreme  importance,  as  at  the  nomination  of 
the  royal  successor.  But  usually  this  office  was  entrusted  to 
two  other  officers,  the  prophet  and  the  seer,  as  Nathan  and 
Gad,  in  the  administration  of  David,  Ahiah  and  Iddo,  in  the 
administration  of  Solomon.  The  non-exercise  of  this  pre- 
rogative most  likely  gave  rise  to  the  more  recent  law,  that  the 
king  should  not  be  allowed  to  preside  over  the  senate,  nor  should 
he  be  entitled  to  an  official  seat  in  that  body. 

We  also  learn  from  the  expounders  of  the  law,  that  the  king 
had  no  jurisdiction  in  legal  matters,  except  in  cases  of  high 
treason  and  conspiracies  against  his  person,  consequently  Saul 
had  a  proper  excuse  to  massacre  the  priestq  of  Nab,  and  to 
persecute  David;  and  in  cases  of  general  corruption  or  disobe- 
dience to  the  law,  he  might  condemn  such  persons,  as  had 
been  cleared  by  courts  of  justice  on  account  of  a  want  of  suffi- 
cient testimony.  But  then  he  had  the  right  to  condemn 
to  death  by  the  sword,  as  Saul  did,  the  priests  of  Nab, 
and  as  Solomon  did  Adoniah,  Joab  and  Shimei.  He  had 
no  right  to  deprive  one  of  his  personal  liberty,  or  to  confiscate 
his  property  during  his  life-time.  This  law  may  have  originated 
at  a  time  when  it  was  dangerous  to  entrust  the  kings  with  the 
right  to  annul  the  judgment  of  a  court  of  justice,  on  account 
of  their  opposition  to  the  law,  and  their  manifest  desire  to 
invade  it;  in  order  to  protect  the  nation  against  malefactors 
who  enjoyed  the  favor  of  the  king.  In  this  period  we  are 
sufficiently  informed  that  the  king  not  only  had  the  jurisdiction! 
as  mentioned  before,  but  he  also  was  invested  with  the  power 
to  punish  an  offender  with  more  severity  than  the  law  pre- 
scribed if  the  nature  of  the  case  was  especially  abominable. 
This  is  clearly  involved  in  the  fictitious  case  of  the  rich  man 
robbing  the  poor  of  his  only  sheep,  which  Nathan  submitted  to 


392  APPENDIX    TO 

David  (II  Samuel  xii).  This  act  the  law  could  punish  as 
nothing  greater  than  larceny;  consequently  no  other  punish- 
ment could  be  imposed  upon  the  offender  than  to  give  four 
sheep  for  the  one  he  robbed  (Exodus  xxii,  37). 

David  on  hearing  the  cause,  said  to  Nathan,  "As  the  Lord 
liveth  the  man  who  hath  done  this  thing  is  a  son  of  death  (he 
shall  die).  And  he  shall  restore  the  lamb  four-fold,  because 
he  did  this  thing,  and  because  he  had  no  pity."  This  judg- 
ment appears  to  have  given  birth  to  the  following  verses  of 
Proverbs  xxii,  22,  23,  "  Rob  not  the  poor  because  he  is  poor; 
neither  oppress  the  afflicted  in  the  gate  (the  seat  of  the  court). 
For  the  Lord  will  plead  their  cause  and  spoil  the  life  of  those 
that  spoiled  them." 

2.  The  king  was  also  invested  with  the  power  to  render 
judgment  in  causes  where  the  courts  of  justice  could  not  de- 
cide for  the  want  of  evidences,  as  it  clearly  appears  from  the 
cause  of  the  two  harlots  brought  before*  Solomon.  Traces  of 
the  perpetual  exercise  of  this  prerogative  are  scattered  over 
the  whole  book  of  Proverbs  (xvi,  10;  xvii,  15;  xxi,  1-3;  xxv, 
5;  xxix,  4,  14,  26). 

3.  The  king  was  invested  with  the  power  to  pardon  the  crimi- 
nal already  condemned  by  the  sentence  of  the  law,  which  is 
clearly  involved  in  the  fictitious  case  of  fratricide,  submitted 
to  David  by  the  wise  woman  of  Tokea,  praying  the  inter- 
ference of  the  king  (II  Samuel  xiv).  We  have  yet  to  quote  in 
support  of  our  view,  that  when  first  a  king  was  demanded,  it 
was  expressly  stated,  "  Set  a  king  over  us  to  judge  «s  as 
among  all  the  other  nations  "  (I  Samuel  v,  5);  that  the  repub- 
lican officers  replaced  by  the  kings  were  called  Judges;  that 
the  people  actually  came  to  David  in  matters  of  justice  (II 
Samuel  xv);  that  Solomon  built  for  himself  a  porch  of  judg- 
ment; that  a  recorder  was  appointed  to  register  the  causes 
submitted  to  the  king;  and  that  the  Jpoet  addressing  the  se- 
venty-second psalm  to  Solomon,  said  (verse  2),  "He  shall 
judge  thy  people  with  righteousness,  and  thy  poor  with  judg- 
ment;" (verse  4)  "He  shall  judge  the  poor  of  the  people,  he 
shall  save  the  children  of  the  needy,  and  he  shall  break  in 


PERIOD    in.  393 

pieces  the  oppressor;*'  (verses  12-11)  "  For  he  shall  deliver 
the  needy  when  he  criethj  the  poor  also,  and  him  that  hath 
no  helper.  He  shall  have  mercy  on  the  poor  and  needy,  and 
shall  save  the  lives  of  the  needy.  He  shall  redeem  their  lives 
from  deceit  and  violence,  and  precious  shall  their  blood  be  in 
his  sight."  This  passage  would  indicate  that  the  king  had 
appellate  and  original  jurisdiction  in  all  cases  submitted  to 
him;  but  it  is  dangerous  to  rely  to  the  letter  upon  the  products 
of  imagination.  Still  it  is  evident  that  the  poet  could  not  have 
spoken  of  it,  if  the  king  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  dispensation 
of  justice.  The  cases  and  passages  quoted  before  show  that 
the  king  had  an  appellate  jurisdiction,  and  was  obliged  to  su- 
perintend the  proper  dispensation  of  justice.  We  have  no 
means  of  ascertaining  the  extent  of  that  power. 

The  income  of  the  king  appears  to  have  depended  on  his 
private  estates,  conquests  in  foreign  countries,  and  private 
undertakings,  as  the  commerce  of  Solomon.  The  expounders 
of  the  law  affirm,  based  upon  a  passage  in  which  Samuel  en- 
deavored to  deter  the  people  from  electing  a  king,  that  he  had 
a  right  to  demand  the  tithe  of  all  the  products  of  the  land,  and 
of  the  increase  of  the  livestocks.  Still  there  is  no  trace  in 
our  sources,  that  such  a  prerogative  was  either  granted  or 
exercised  by  the  kings  of  Jehudah  or  of  Israel.  The  public 
treasury  attached  to  the  house  of  the  Lord  was  not  under  the 
immediate  control  of  the  king;  it  was  guarded  by  Levites  and 
not  by  the  king's  soldiers.  It  appears  that  no  officer  had  a 
fixed  salary,  that  the  officials  depended  on  their  private  estates, 
and  on  the  presents  given  to  them  by  their  constituents.  The 
army  of  course,  the  Levites,  and  the  priests,  as  remarked 
before,  were  exceptions  in  this  respect.  t  The  public  treasury, 
too,  appears  to  have  depended  on  the  booty  taken  in  war,  and 
on  the  voluntary  gifts  of  the  people,  as  before.*  The  half- 
shekel  tax  for  each  person  above  twenty  years  of  age,  which 
Moses  levied,  was  maintained  under  the  name  Maseath  Mosheh, 

*  Leviticus  xxvii,  v,  14;  Numbers  xxxi;  Joshua  vi,  24;  I  Samuel  xv,  ]5; 
ibid  xvi,  20-,  ibid  xvii,  17,  18;  ibid  xxx,  20-31 ;  71  Samuel  viii,  11,  12;  I 
Chronicles  xviii,  8-11;  ibid  xxvi,  20-28;  ibid  xxix,  6-8;  II  Chron.  v. 


394  APPENDIX   TO 

tax  of  Moses.  But  this  tax  is  not  mentioned  before  the  time 
of  king  Joash,  and  then  it  is  mentioned  only  for  the  purpose  of 
renovating  the  temple  (II  Chronicles  xxiv,  9). 

The  king  appointed  his  officers,  and  he  could  also  remove 
them,  as  David  removed  Joab  twice  from  office.  The  ex- 
pounders of  the  law  assert,  that  it  was  not  in  the  power  of 
the  king  to  appoint  a  high  priest,  or  to  remove  him  from  office, 
which  appears  also  in  our  sources.  If  David  had  been  entitled 
to  appoint  the  high  priest,  he  would  certainly  have  conferred 
that  dignity  on  Ebiathar,  whose  family  was  massacred  on 
account  of  David,  and  who  remained  faithful  to  htm  ever  after- 
wards, accompanying  him  through  all  scenes  of  persecution; 
And  if  Solomon  had  the  power  to  remove  the  proxy  of  the 
high  priest,  Ebiathar,  the  friend  of  Adomiah,  would  not  have 
been  recalled  to  his  office  from  his  private  estate. 

In  respect  to  the  senate  we  notice  the  alteration,  that  the 
king's  officers,  and  the  military  commanders,  appear  to  have 
had  a  seat  in  that  august  body  (I  Chron.  xxviii),  which  was 
necessary  in  order  to  represent  the  interests  of  the  king  and 
the  army.  In  all  other  respects  the  law  of  Moses  was  in  full 
force,  as  is  clearly  seen  by  the  frequent  reference  made  to  it  in 
the  literature  of  that  age,  as  we  shall  notice  hereafter,  and  in 
the  whole  course  of  affairs,  as  described  in  our  sources. 

The  government,  as  the  reader  must  have  observed,  was  a 
moderate  transition  from  the  republic  to  a  monarchy,  still  con- 
taining the  patriarchal  character  of  the  Mosaic  institutions. 
No  other  form  of  monarchy  could  be  imposed  upon  a  people 
who  had  lived  for  four  centuries  under  the  republic  with  the 
Mosaic  laws.  And  there  is  no  other  rational  ground  to  ac- 
count for  a  constitutional  fabric  of  government,  so  perfect  and 
liberal  as  the  one  just  described,  of  which  no  other  nation  of 
that  age  can  boast,  as  the  respect  felt  for  the  Mosaic  laws  by 
the  people  at  large. 

The  policy  of  the  kings  of  Israel  differed  materially  from 
that  of  Moses.  The  acquisition  of  territory  under  Saul  and 
David,  and  the  necessity  of  supporting  a  standing  army  in  the 
conquered  provinces,    changed  entirely  the    state   of   affairs. 


PERIOD    III.  S95 

To  this  came  yet  an  extensive  commerce  in  the  days  of  Solo- 
mon, which  produced  new  relations  to  foreign  powers,  and 
new  interests  at  home.  The  equality  of  material  possessions 
which  formed  the  basis  of  the  Mosaic  policy,  could  be  main- 
tained no  longer.  We  may  safely  say  that  the  Solomonic  ago 
was  the  end  of  the  Mosaic  policy,  and  the  beginning  of  a  new 
political  epoch.  The  prophets,  the  staunch  defenders  of  the 
Mosaic  law,  opposed  the  innovations  of  the  king,  which  most 
likely  tended  to  the  worship  of  foreign  idols,  the  insignia  of  a 
new  policy.  We  know  of  no  other  way  to  account  for  the 
sudden  change  in  the  religious  views  of  Solomon.  But  we 
conclude  this  subject  for  the  present,  intending  to  treat  on  it 
more  fully  hereafter. 

III.    RELIGION. 

Religion  is  an  important  matter  in  the  laws  and  policy  of  all 
nations,  ancient  and  modern,  the  United  States  excepted;  and 
so  it  was,  especially  among  the  ancient  Israelites.  A  united 
adherence  to  the  national  religion,  marked  also  at  the  same 
time  their  respect  for  the  law,  their  love  of  justice*  and  right- 
eousness, their  national  pride,  and  their  strong  union,  to 
which  their  religion  was  the  center  of  gravity.  From  the  first 
days  of  Samuel  to  the  last  days  of  Solomon,  no  idolatry,  no 
dissenting  from  the  national  religion  is  noticed,  which  is  a 
negative  proof  e  silentio,  that  the  national  religion,  as  instituted 
by  Moses,  was  generally  acknowledged,  revered,  and  practiced. 
But  wc  have  too  much  positive  evidence  to  this  effect  to  need 
an  argument  e  silentio.  There  was  yet  in  existence,  in  the 
days  of  Solomon,  the  same  ark,  containing  the  same  tables 
that  existed  in  the  days  of  Moses.  In  Gibeon  stood  the  same 
tabernacle,  with  the  same  altars  and  sacred  vessels,  at  which 
Moses  and  Aaron  worshipped  the  Lord  of  Hosts ;  and  officers 
of  the  same  tribe,  charged  with  the  same  duties  and  possessing 
the  same  privileges,  without  having  changed  even  the  names  of 
the  respective  offices,  superintended  divine  worship  at  Gibeon 
and  Jerusalem,,  as  once  in  the  Wilderness  of  Sin.  The  temple 
of  Solomon  was,   in  its  principal  parts,    an  imitation  of  the 


396  APPENDIX    TO 

Mosaic  Tabernacle,  and  it  was  erected  to  the  same  glorious 
ruler  of  the  universe,  who  proclaimed  his  majesty  and  his  will 
in  the  rolling  thunders  of  Sinai  to  an  amazed  multitude.  The 
same  celestial  fire  which  once  consumed  the  dedicatory  sacri- 
fices of  Moses  also  consumed  the  sacrifices  of  Solomon,  and 
like  Moses  also,  Solomon  celebrated  that  feast  for  seven  days, 
to  which  both  of  them  appear  to  have  added  seven  days  more. 
As  Moses  and  Aaron  did,  so  also  did  Solomon  bless  the  people 
after  the  solemn  services  were  ended ;  and  the  ark  occupied 
the  same  apartment  in  the  'temple  of  Solomon  which  it  once 
occupied  in  the  tabernacle  of  Moses.  If  we  consider  the  love 
of  innovation  which  characterised  Solomon  in  connection  with 
this  strict  adherence  to  Mosaic  institutions  and  ceremonies, 
we  may  deduce  from  it  a  strong  testimony  of  the  general  rever- 
ence entertained  for  the  national  religion.  To  this  we  may  add 
the  endeavors  of  David  to  have  the  ark  and  the  tabernacle 
removed  to  Zion;  his  failing  endeavors  to  build  a  temple;  the 
immense  treasures  collected  for  that  purpose,  and  the  general 
satisfaction  which  was  felt  by  the  erection  and  dedication  of 
Solomon's  temple;  the  persecution  of  witches  and  enchanters 
by  Saul ;  the  burning  of  the  Phelistine  idols  captured  in  the 
battle  at  the  plain  of  Rephaim  by  David;  the  care  bestowed 
upon  the  organization  of  the  priests  and  Levites ;  the  marked 
influence  of  the  prophets;  the  indignation  of  the  senate  when 
Solomon  yielded  to  the  idolatry  of  his  wives,  as  our  sources 
call  it;  the  pretensions  to  a  divine  revelation  by  David,  in  his 
endeavors  to  secure  the  crown  to  his  dynasty,  and  of  Solomon 
to  win  the  confidence  of  the  people  to  his  wisdom.  All  these 
facts  satisfy  us  that  an  eminent  piety  and  a  decided  veneration 
for  the  Mosaic  religion  pervaded  the  generality  of  the  people, 
which  obliged  the  rulers  and  officers  to  act  accordingly. 

The  best  testimony  to  this  effect  is  the  literature  of  that 
age — on  which  we  shall  next  treat— in  which  is  perceptible  the 
same  subfime  spirit,  pure  sentiments,  lofty  flight  of  imagina- 
tion, pious  maxims,  reverence  of  monotheism,  and  attachment 
to  nature  and  its  maker,  which  are  impressed  on  the  Mosaic 
scriptures,  and  of  which  it  appears  as  the  grapes  of  the  same 


PERIOD    III.  397 

vine.  The  poetical  literature  may  safely  be  considered  as  the 
mirror  of  the  age,  for  the  poet  acquires  not  his  ideas  by  the 
wearisome  toil  of  study,  as  the  philosopher  who  transcends 
his  age;  he  is  impressed  with  that  which  surrounds  him,  and 
pours  forth  his  inspiration  on  subjects  most  admired  or  most 
venerated  in  his  time.  In  times  of  political  convulsions, 
political  poems  are  most  predominant.  The  lyric  poet  nourishes 
in  times  of  peace,  when  a  refined  taste  and  an  admiration  of 
the  beautiful  have  become  general.  The  pious  poet  could 
exist  only  in  an  age  of  piety.  If  Baal,  Moloch,  Adonis,  and 
the  literature  of  Hermes,  had  engaged  the  admiration  and 
reverence  of  the  generality,  their  praise  would  resound  in  the 
poetical  literature  of  that  age,  as  this  is  the  case  in  the 
mental  productions  of  the  respective  nations;  but  it  is  the 
praise  of  Jehovah  and  of  the  law  of  Moses,  which  reechoes  in 
the  sublime  productions  of  Israel's  inspired  [bards. 

There  is  no  evidence  that  the  divine  service  of  the  temple 
differed  from  that  of  the  Mosaic  tabernacle.  The  three  na- 
tional feasts,  and  the  new  moon's  day,  continued  to  be  dis- 
tinguished by  additional  sacrifices.  The  sanctity  of  the  sab- 
bath also  was  signalized  by  additional  offerings.*  Incense 
was  burnt,  the  lamps  were  kindled  daily,  and  all  other  cere- 
monies as  prescribed  by  Moses,  were  conscientiously  observed. 
The  people  continued  to  be  mere  spectators,  for  which  pur- 
pose the  temple  had  outside  galleries,  from  which  its  interior 
could  be  seen  through  windows,  and  a  large  enclosure,  called 
the  court  of  the  temple  (Isaiah  i,  12).  The  only  alteration 
consisted  in  the  progress  made  in  the  art  of  music  and  poetry, 
which  were  rendered  subservient  to  the  imposing  grandeur  of 
the  divine  ceremonies,  and  gave  the  Levites  a  larger  share  of 
public  favor  than  the  priests.  Prayer  appears  to  have  been 
a  part  of  public  worship.*  Preaching  and  the  reading  of  the 
law  in  public  are  not  noticed  during  this  period,  but  sacred 
hymns  are  frequently  noticed  by  the  author  of  Chronicles,  as 

II  Chronicles  viii,  13;  Isaiah  i,  13-14. 

f  I  Kings  viii,  22;  II  Chronicles  vi,  14;  Isaiah  i,  15. 


398  APPENDIX    TO 

having  been  part  of  the  divine  service.  These  were  sung  by 
the  choruses  of  Levites,  assisted  by  cantrices.  On  the  whole 
we  may  safely  say,  that  the  Mosaic  laws  and  religion  had 
reached  the  zenith  of  power  during  this  period,  although  the 
Mosaic  policy  was  materially  changed. 

IV.  MUSIC. 
If  it  be  true,  what  so  many  philosophers  affirm,  that  the 
love  of  Music  indicates  a  refined  taste  and  noble  sentiments, 
then  the  ancient  Israelites  could  boast  of  both  a  refined  taste 
and  noble  sentiments,  for  the  practice  of  music  was  one  of 
their  favorite  amusements.  They  could  so  little  think  of  man 
without  music,  that  they  ascribed  the  invention  of  it  to  a 
patriach  (Jubal)  of  the  antediluvian  period.  We  have  no- 
ticed the  existence  of  musical  instruments  through  the  whole 
of  history  up  to  this  period.  The  school  of  Samuel  appears 
to  have  been  the  nursery  of  this  art,  so  that  we  read  I  Samuel 
x,  5:  "  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when  thou  (Saul)  art  come 
thither  to  the  city,  that  thou  shalt  meet  a  company  of  prophets, 
coining  down  from  the  high  place  with  a  psaltry,  and  a  tabret, 
and  a  pipe,  and  a  harp  before  them."  Of  David,  too,  we  learn 
(ibid  xvi,  18)  that  he  was  an  eminent  musician  when  quite 
young,  and  that  his  tunes  alone  succeeded  to  pacify  the  agitated 
mind  of  Saul.  When  David  took  the  ark  from  Gibeah,  we 
read  (II  Samuel  vi,  4):  "And  David,  and  all  the  house  of 
Israel,  played  before  the  Lord  on  all  manner  of  instruments 
made  of  fir- wood,  even  on  harps,  and  on  psaltries,  and 
on  timbrels,  and  on  cornets,  and  on  cymbals"  (verse  15). 
"  David,  and  all  the  house  of  Israel,  brought  up  the  ark  of  the 
Lord  with  the  sound  of  the  tamborine  and  the  trumpet," 
which  musical  choruses  are  beautifully  described  in  the  sixty- 
eighth  Psalm  (25-26),  apparently  composed  on  that  occasion. 
"  The  singers  went  before,  the  players  on  instruments  followed 
after;  among  them  were  the  damsels  playing  with  timbrels. 
They  praised  God  in  choruses,  even  the  Lord  from  the  founda- 
tion of  Israel."  In  the  tabernacle  of  David,  as  has  been 
noticed  before,  four  thousand  Levites  were  instructed  in  music 


PERIOD  III.  3i>9 

and  song  by  two  hundred  and  eighty-eight  teachers,  to  assist 
in  divine  worship,  under  twenty-four  different  leaders.  This 
art  was  yet  improved  in  the  days  of  Solomon,  as  is  evident 
from  the  precious  ahnug  of  which  the  instruments  were  made, 
and  from  the  general  patronage  of  Solomon  to  art  and  science. 
But  music  was  not  merely  used  for  sacred  purposes,  it  was  in 
common  use  also.  The  women  met  Saul  and  the  heroic  David 
with  songs  and  music,  with  tamborines,  joys,  and  triangles  (I 
Samuel  xviii).  Chanters  and  cantrices  were  employed  at  the 
Davidian  court  (II  Samuel  xix,  36),  and  at  the  court  of  Solo- 
mon. Both  of  these  monarchs  were  musicians  and  singers.* 
In  private  companies,  too,  music  formed  one  of  the  attractions, 
so  that  Isaiah  could  say,  ■*  And  the  harp,  and  the  viol,  the 
tabret,  and  pipe,  and  wine  are  in  their  feasts."  On  the  whole 
we  find  mentioned  eight  different  kinds  of  stringed  instru- 
ments, seven  different  kinds  of  wind  instruments,  six  different 
kinds  of  percussion  instruments,  and  seven  of  an  uncertain 
character,  viz:  Muthlaben,  shoshanim,  jonath-elim-rehokim, 
ayelethhashahar,  shushaneduth  and  jeduthun,  which  teach  us 
that  this  art  had  reached  a  high  degree  of  perfection  among  the 
ancient  Israelites.  If  we  estimate  the  state  of  the  art  from 
the  number  of  performers  and  instruments  employed,  we  may 
say  that  it  stood  as  high,  if  not  higher,  than  at  the  present  time. 
The  Hebrew  term  for  singer  is  derived  from  the  verb  shur, 
to  look  at;  whether  on  account  of  the  singers  looking  at  notes, 
or  at  the  text  of  the  song,  can  not  now  be  ascertained.  That 
they  were  acquainted  with  the  principles  of  rhythm  is  evident 
from  the  poetry  of  that  age.  That  so  many  different  instru- 
ments could  not  be  used  without  an  understanding  of  the  laws 
of  harmony  is  self-evident.  That  signs  existed  to  mark  those 
relations  is  unquestionable,  although  we  are  not  acquainted 
with  their  character.  The  Hebrew  idiom,  "  He  knows  to  sing 
and  play,"  instead  of  he  can  sing  and  play,  convinces  us  that 
music  was  regarded  as  a  science  as  well  as  an  art,  and  that 
musical  signs — though  now  lost — existed  among  the  Hebrews. 


*I  Kings  x,  12;  Ecles.  ii.  8. 


400  APPENDIX    TO 

V.  LITERATURE. 

The  fragments  of  the  literature  of  that  age  which  have 
reached  us  are  well  calculated  to  make  us  regret  the  loss  of  the 
greatest  part  of  it.  Numbers  of  authors  are  mentioned  during 
this  age,  such  as  Ethan  ha-Ezrahi,  Himail,  Chalchol,  Darda, 
and  others.  The  names  of  different  books  too  have  reached  us, 
the  book  of  Jashar  (II  Samuel  i,  18);  the  three  thousand  pro- 
verbs, one  thousand  and  five  songs,  and  the  natural  history  of 
Solomon  (I  Kings  v,  12,  13);  the  book  Dibrai  Shelomoh  (1 
Kings  xi,  42);  the  three  books  of  Samuel,  Nathan  and  Gad 
(I  Chronicles  xxix,  29) — which  appear  to  have  contained  a 
detailed  history  of  the  known  world  at  that  time — the  pro- 
phecies of  Ahiah  and  of  Iddo  concerning  Jeroboam  (II  Chron. 
ix,  29),  and  the  Meshal  Kadmoni  (the  eastern  proverbialist), 
which  David  mentioned  to  Saul  (I  Samuel  xxiv,  14),  by  quoting 
from  them  thus:  "  Wickedness  comes  of  the  wicked."  But  if 
we  had  not  these  traces  of  books  from  that  age,  the  productions 
before  us  could  not  fail  to  suggest  the  idea,  that  many  more 
writers  must  have  flourished  then ;  for  it  is  a  matter  of  impos- 
sibility that  only  one  or  two  writers  so  eminent  as  the  authors 
of  Psalms  and  Proverbs  should  exist  in  an  age  without  being 
accompanied  by  minor  talents.  Those  productions  could  ori- 
ginate in  a  literary  age  only.  The  author  of  Chronicles  also 
informs  us,  that  there  came  to  David,  in  Hebron,  two  hundred 
chiefs  of  Issachar,  all  of  whom  were  learned  lawyers.  Some 
suppose  the  term  signifies  chronologists.  It  has,  at  least,  the 
effect  of  showing  that  learning  was  extensively  cultivated  before 
the  age  of  David. 

We  possess  of  that  age  the  following  books :  Samuel,  parts 
of  the  Psalms,  Proverbs,  and  the  Song  of  Solomon,  on  which 
we  shall  treat  in  order.  Ecclesiastes,  is,  as  its  style  and  con- 
tents abundantly  testify,  a  much  later  production.  It  was 
written  by  one  who  understood  perfectly  well  the  moral  con- 
dition of  king  Solomon,  when  he  had  exhausted  the  cup  of 
pleasure,  and  had  learned  to  despise  the  charms  of  wealth, 
pomp  and  luxury,  and  when  with  the  energies  of  the  body  tho 
buoyancy  of  the  mind  was  also  wasted.     Such  an  exhaustion 


PERIOD     III.  401 

of  the  energies  produces  effeminacy  and  scepticism,  which 
determine  either  in  despair,  in  atheism,  or  in  blind  piety.  The 
author  of  Ecclesiastes  supposed  that  the  latter  was  the  case 
with  Solomon.  We  will  treat  at  length  on  that  book  in  another 
place. 

The  ancient  rabbins  were  of  the  opinion  that  Samuel  himself 
wrote  part  of  the  book  bearing  his  name,  but  the  author  makes 
no  such  pretension.  In  I  Samuel  iii,  we  read,  "The  word  of 
the  Lord  was  precious  in  those  days,  there  was  no  vision 
general."'  I  Samuel  v,  5,  we  read,  "  Therefore  neither  the 
priests  of  Dagon,  nor  any  that  came  into  Dagon's  house,  tread 
on  the  threshold  of  Dagon  in  Ashdod  unto  this  day.  I  Samuel 
ix,  9,  it  is  stated,  "  Beforetime  in  Israel,  when  a  man  went  to 
inquire  of  God,  thus  he  spoke,  Come,  and  let  us  go  to  the  seer; 
for  he  that  is  now  called  a  prophet  was  beforetime  called  a 
seer."  On  the  other  side,  it  must  be  remarked,  that  the  author 
nowhere  gives  the  least  reason  to  suppose  this  book  had  not 
been  written  shortly  after  the  death  of  David.  In  I  Samuel 
xxx,  25,  we  read.  "And  it  was  so  from  that  day  forward,  that 
he  made  it  a  statute  and  an  ordinance  for  Israel  unto  this  day;" 
and  II  Samuel  xviii,  18,  "And  he  called  the  pillar  after  his  own 
name,  and  it  is  called  unto  this  day,  Absalom's  Place."  These 
are  the  only  references  as  to  time;  and  there  is  no  cause  given 
to  make  us  suppose  the  book  did  not  originate  with  one  who 
nourished  in  the  days  of  Solomon.  It  must  also  be  remarked 
that  the  history  of  David,  and  that  part  of  the  history  of  So- 
lomon up  to  I  Kings  iv,  have  many  peculiarities.  While  the 
books  of  Judges  and  Kings  are  mere  synopses  of  larger  works, 
bestowing  more  care  in  the  history  of  wars,  of  public  works, 
and  of  the  punishments  of  God  in  consequence  of  idolatry, 
the  author  of  Samuel  and  of  the  three  first  chapters  of  I  Kings 
bestows  little  attention  on  warfare,  noticing  the  different  cam- 
paigns in  a  concise  style,  and  gives  a  more  thorough  history  of 
events,  which  have  a  bearing  on  the  character  of  his  principal 
men,  and  on  the  age.  The  style  of  Samuel  and  of  the  first 
three  chapters  of  I  Kings  is  entirely  different  from  any  other 
historical  books  of  the  Bible.  It  is  a  clear,  concise  and  ener- 
26 


402  APPENDIX  TO 

gctic  prose  style  interwoven  with  pieces  of  poetry,  which  he 
ascribes  to  other  authors.*  The  speeches  recorded  in  it  are 
remarkable  for  their  boldness,  and  bear  the  stamp  of  originali- 
ty; and  the  conversations  which  the  author  preserves,  are 
distinguished  for  beauty  of  language  and  opulence  of  thought. 
All  these  characteristics  point  to  the  age  of  Solomon. 

Hence  we  may  remark,  that  it  is  rather  peculiar  that  the 
last  part  of  the  history  of  David  commences  the  book  of  Kings, 
while  the  book  of  Samuel  was  evidently  written  with  the  view 
to  give  a  full  and  impartial  history  of  David;  that  the  second 
chapter  of  I  Kings  ends  with  the  phrase,  "  And  the  kingdom 
was  established  in  the  hand  of  Solomon;"  and  the  fourth 
chapter  begins  with  "  King  Solomon  was  king  over  all  Israel;" 
that  it  is  mentioned  in  the  second  chapter,  verse  twelve,  Solo- 
mon sat  upon  the  throne  of  David  his  father,  and  his  kingdom 
was  established  greatly,"  which  sufficiently  informs  us  of  the 
extent  of  Solomon's  empire,  having  been  that  of  his  father. 
Still  the  fifth  chapter  begins  (in  the  English  authorized  version 
iv,  21):  "  And  Solomon  was  the  ruler  over  all  the  kingdoms 
from  the  river  (Euphrates)  to  the  land  of  the  Phelistines  and 
to  the  boundaries  of  Egypt."  In  the  third  chapter  we  are 
told  of  the  dream  of  Solomon,  in  which  he  pretended  to  have 
received  of  God  especial  wisdom,  concluding  with,  "And 
Solomon  awoke  and  behold  it  was  a  dream,"  the  author  clearly 
suggesting  to  the  reader  his  own  idea  on  the  subject ;  he  then 
continues  to  show  that  his  fame  as  a  wise  man  was  acquired 
by  the  judgment  rendered  in  the  case  of  the  two  harlots,  with- 
out bestowing  one  word  of  praise  on  the  wisdom  of  Solomon — 
a  method  which  the  author  of  Samuel  strictly  observed.  Still 
in  chapter  v,  verses  9-11  we  are  told  again,  that  God  dis- 
tinguished Solomon  with  wisdom  of  the  highest  order,  that  he 
was  wiser  than  the  wisest  of  his  nation,  the  wise  men  of 
Egypt  and  of  all  the  sons  of  the  east,  v,  26.  We  are  told 
again,  "  And  the  Lord  gave  wisdom  to  Solomon,  as  he  had  said 
unto   him."     Hence  it  is  remarkable  that  the  earlier  history  of 


*  1  Samuel  ii,   1-10  •,  II  Samuel  i,  17-27;  iv,  33,34;  xxii;  xxiii,    1-7. 


PERIOD     III, 


403 


Solomon,  like  that  of  David,  is  complete  in  all  its  particulars, 
while  the  later  history,  commencing  with  the  fourth  chapter  of 
Kings,  is  deficient  both  in  materials,  arrangement  and  chro- 
nology, falling  rather  into  the  mythical  tone,  so  that  it  is  almost 
evident,  that  while  the  book  of  Samuel  and  the  first  three 
chapters  of  Kings, .belonging  to  the  same  author,  were  written 
in  an  age  when  the  history  of  David  and  of  the  first  part  of 
Solomon's  reign  were  yet  fresh  in  the  memory  of  the  people, 
the  other  part  of  Solomon's  history  was  written  centuries  after 
his  death.  If  we  are  not  greatly  mistaken,  the  facts  adduced 
demonstrate,  that  the  first  three  chapters  of  I  Kings  properly 
belong  to  II  Samuel,  having  the  same  author.  If  so,  we  have 
ascertained  the  precise  time  when  the  book  of  Samuel  was 
written.  It  must  have  been  during  the  first  years  of  Solomon's 
reign;  for  had  it  been  after  the  bnilding  of  the  temple,  the 
author  would  certainly  have  mentioned  the  fact.  The  author 
has  no  knowledge  of  the  final  degeneracy  of  Solomon;  for  he 
informs  us,  iii,  3,  that  Solomon  loved  the  Lord  and  walked  in 
the  statutes  of  David,  his  father.  It  is  easy  to  explain  how 
those  three  chapters  came  in  the  book  of  Kings.  The  books  of 
Samuel  and  Kings  were  considered  one  book  as  late  as  the 
time  of  Josephus  and  Philo,  as,  indeed,  Kings  is  but  a  continu- 
ation of  Samuel.  When  afterwards  those  books  were  separated, 
the  last  part  of  the  history  of  David,  forming  the  introduction 
to  the  history  of  Solomon,  was  prefixed  to  the  book  of  Kings. 
The  author  of  Chronicles  furnishes  us  with  the  original 
sources,  and  of  which  the  book  of  Samuel  was  compiled,  viz: 
the  three  books  of  Samuel,  Nathan  and  Gad  (I  Chron.  xxix, 
29).  The  name  of  the  author  can  not  be  ascertained,  so  many 
literati  having  flourished  in  that  age.*     The  frequent  imitation 

*  Traces  of  the  Pentateuch  in  Samuel;  compare  I  Samuel  ii,  1-10  with 
Deutr.  xxxii:  ibid  iii,  19-21  with  Genesis  xxxv,  10-18;  ibid  vj,  0  with 
Exodus  x,  1-2;  ibid  vii,  3  with  Genesis  xxxv,  2;  ibid  xiv,  23  with  Exodus 
xiv,  30;  ibid  xv.  2  with  Exodus  xvii.  14;  ibid  xv,  29  with  Numbers  xxiii, 
19;  ibid  xvii.  40  with  Deutr.  xxviii,  25,  20;  ibid  xxiv,  13  with  Genesis  xvi, 
5;  ibid  xxx,  23  with  Numbers  xxxi;  ibid  xxxviii,  22-24  with  Genesis  xviii, 
1-9.  In  I  Kings  ii,  14,  occurs  the  phrase.  "  As  is  written  in  the  book  of  the 
law  "of  Moses."     Mosaic  laws  are   mentioned  in  Samuel;  the  prohibition  to 


404  APPENDIX    TO 

of  verses  of  the  Pentateuch  in  I  Samuel,  seems  to  indicate 
that  it  was  extracted  from  the  proper  book  of  Samuel,  in  whose 
time  the  Hebrew  style  had  not  yet  become  sufficiently  inde- 
pendent and  original.  II  Samuel  is  written  in  an  altogether 
independent  and  original  style. 

It  has  been  remarked  before,  that  the  last  five  chapters  of 
Judges  and  the  book  of  Ruth  belong  to  this  period. 

The  one  hundred  and  fifty  psalms,  which  have  reached  us, 
were  divided  by  the  compilers  of  the  canon  into  five  books. 
The  first  book  includes  the  forty -one  psalms  from  chapter  i  to 
xli.  The  second  book  includes  the  thirty-one  psalms  from 
chapter  xlii  to  lxxii.  The  third  book  contains  the  seventy 
psalms  from  chapter  lxxiii  to  lxxxix.  The  fourth  book  con- 
tains the  sixteen  psalms  from  chapter  xc  to  cvi.  The  fifth 
book  contains  the  forty-three  psalms,  cvii  to  cl.  Each  of  those 
books,  viz  :  the  last  verse  of  psalms  xli,  lxxii,  lxxxix,  cvi,  and 
the  cl,  ends  thus,  "  Praised  be  Jehovah  the  God  of  Israel  from 
eternity  to  eternity,  amen  and  amen,"  which  is  altered,  at  the 
end  of  the  whole,  into  "  Every  soul  praise  the  Lord,  Halelu- 
jah;"  so  that  the  intention  of  having  the  whole  divided  into 
five  books  is  evident.  But  the  second  book — Psalm  lxxii — 
concludes  with,  "The  prayers  of  David,  son  of  Jesse,  are 
ended,"  which  shows  that  the  compiler  of  the  first  seventy- 
two  psalms  was  ignorant  of  the  rest  of  them.  The  fact  that 
in  the  second  book,  two  psalms  of  the  first  book  occur  (com- 
pare Psalm  liii  with  xiv,  and  lxx  with  xl,  14-18)  strongly 
supports  the  idea  that  the  first  forty-one  chapters  are  the  most 
ancient  collection  of  psalms — made  shortly  after  the  death  of 
David — which  the  compiler  provided  with  an  introduction, 
making  now  the  first  chapter,  and  with  an  appropriate  conclu- 
sion (xli,  14),  which  was  imitated  by  every  subsequent  com- 
piler. This  hypothesis  is  supported  also  by  the  fact,  that  all 
the  psalms  of  the  first  book  with  the  exception  of  Psalms  i,  ii, 

eat  blood,  I  Samuel  xiv,  34;  circumcision  mentioned  indirectly  ibid  xviii  25; 
the  festivities  of  the  new  moon's  day,  ibid  xx,  5-18;  not  to  eat  of  the  sacrifice 
when  impure,  ibid  xx,  26;  the  shewbreads  belong  to  the  priests  and  must  be 
eaten  in  purity,  ibid  xxi,  5-7;  the  avenger  of  blood,  II  Samuel  xiv,  2 


PERIOD   III.  405 

x,  and  xxx,  are  expressly  ascribed  to  David,  among  which  is 
also  Psalm  xviii,  for  which  we  have  the  testimony  of  the  author 
of  II  Samuel  (xxii)  that  it  originated  with  David.  Psalm  i 
is  an  introduction  to  the  collection;  Psalm  ii  is,  as  we  have 
remarked  before,  the  production  of  Solomon;*  the  collection 
being  made  under  his  supervision,  his  psalm  was  set  at  the 
head  of  the  book.  Psalm  x  is  considered  by  the  most  eminent 
critics  as  a  part  of  Psalm  ix,  and  Psalm  xxxiii,  to  which  the 
last  verse  of  Psalm  xxxii  gave  the  leading  idea,  appears  to  be 
rather  the  work  of  the  more  scientific  Solomon  than  of  David ; 
being  also  a  response  to  Psalm  xxxii.  This  first  collection 
must  have  been  made  before  Solomon  married  the  daughter  of 
Pharaoh;  for  if  before,  the  forty-sixth  Psalm,  being  a  nuptial 
ode  addressed  to  Solomon  on  that  occasion,  would  have  been 
inserted.  Psalm  lxxii  was  addressed  to  Solomon  at  an  ad- 
vanced period  of  his  reign. |  Psalm  cxxvii,  also  ascribed  to 
Solomon,  was  not  made  until  after  the  dedication  of  the  temple, 
and  is  a  response  to  the  address  I  Kings  ix,  3-9.  This  col- 
lection was  made  after  the  author  of  Samuel  had  completed 
his  work,  for  Psalm  xviii  is  much  improved.  It  was  made  by 
Asaph — wherefore  it  was  called  "  the  words  of  David  and 
Asaph  the  seer  " — for  the  purpose  of  divine  worship  (II  Chron. 
xxix,  30).  All  the  objections  that  can  be  urged  in  opposition 
to  this  view  is  the  concluding  verse  of  Psalm  xiv,  when  the 
return  of  the  captives  of  Jacob  and  Israel  is  mentioned.  The 
same  conclusion  occurs  when  this  Psalm  is  repeated  (liii). 
The  reason  of  this  seems  to  be,  that  this  chapter  was  not 
found  complete,  having  no  conclusion  whatever,  wherefore  the 
last  compiler  added  this  verse  to  both  those  chapters.  There 
is  no  historical  evidence  in  existence,  that  David  wrote  more 
than  the  eighteenth  psalm,  which  our  historian  mentions  (II 
Samuel  xxii).  Nay,  there  is  even  a  strong  argument  e  silentio, 
that  David  either  wrote  none  of  the  psalms  except  the 
eighteenth,  or  that  his   poetical   compositions  were  so  incon- 

*  Compare  Psalm  ii.  7  with  II  Samuel  vii,  14. 
t  Compare  Psalm  lxxii,  10  vmh  I  Kings  x. 


406  APPENDIX    TO 

siderable,  that  the  historians  did  not  notice  them.  The  author 
of  Samuel,  who  collected  every  particular  of  the  history  of 
David,  tells  us,  that  he  composed  three  poems;  the  author  of 
Chronicles  was  especially  careful  to  elevate  David,  omitting 
all  those  parts  of  David's  history  which  threw  a  stain  on  his 
character.  Should  they  not  have  mentioned  the  numerous 
poems  of  David  in  such  a  way  as  the  author  of  Kings  mentions 
the  literary  productions  of  Solomon?  The  term  inS,  which 
stands  at  the  head  of  the  seventy- two  chapters  commonly 
ascribed  to  David,  can  not  be  rendered  "  Of  David  "  or  "  By 
David;"  for  there  are  Psalms  bearing  this  head  which  were 
not  written  in  his  age  (Psalms  lxix,  li);  Psalm  ex,  having  the 
same  head,  is  evidently  addressed  to  David,  and  other  psalms 
of  the  same  head  are  evidently  but  a  faint  imitation  of  previous 
chapters.*  There  may  be  here  and  there  a  Davidian  psalm 
among  them,  but  on  the  whole  the  head  nnS  says  no  more,  than 
that  those  psalms  were  written  to  David,  in  which  style  after- 
wards new  psalms  were  composed,  as  late  as  the  time  of  the 
Maccabees. 

The  antiquity  of  only  the  first  book  of  Psalms  can  be  de- 
fended, although  there  are  in  the  other  books  also  some  very 
ancient  compositions  so  that  even  Jeremiah  (xxx,  10),  quoted 
passages  of  the  psalms  (c,  1;  cvi,  1).  In  Jonah  appears  a 
whole  prayer  (ii,  3-10),  composed  of  passages  of  psalms  ;|  and 
the  author  of  Job  not  only  quoted  extensively  from  Psalms,  but 
the  last  chapters  of  that  book  (xxxviii-xli)  are  totally  based 
upon  Psalms  viii,  xix,  xxix,  and  civ.  The  other  four  books, 
although  containing  chapters  belonging  to  this  period,  must  be 
considered  in  another  part  of  this  history. 

We  see  in  Psalms  xc — cv,  very  ancient  productions.  There 
are  good  reasons  to  believe  in  the  rabbinical  tradition,  that 
these  Psalms  were  composed  in  a  pre-Davidian  age,  of  which 
only  the  ninety-ninth  psalm  might  be  an  exception.  We  have 
the  same   opinion  of  Psalms  cxi-exviii,  the  high  antiquity  of 

*  Compare  Psalms  lxx  with  xl;  cxliv  with  xviii. 

t  Psalms  v,  8;  xviii,  5,  7;  xxxi,  7,  23;  xlii,  8;  ciii,  4;  cxvi,  3,  17,  IS; 
cxlii,  4. 


PERIOD    III.  407 

which  is  also  admitted  by  the  ancient  rabbins.  We  consider 
them  as  the  hymns  of  the  Mosaic  tabernacle.  Psalm  lxxx  must 
have  been  composed  in  the  time  of  Joshua,*  or  in  the  time  of 
Ishboslieth,  son  and  successor  of  Saul. 

The  history  of  the  psalmodic  literature  must  be  dated  as 
far  back  as  Moses;  his  two  songs  and  his  prayer  were  the 
prototype  of  all  psalms.  Succeeding  generations,  down  to  the 
Davidian  period,  produced  new  compositions  of  this  nature  and 
in  this  style,  in  which  may  be  classed  the  song  of  Deborah 
and  the  prayer  of  Hannah.  When,  in  consequence  of  the 
scholastic  institute  of  Samuel,  poetry  and  music  had  attained 
a  high  degree  of  perfection — which  was  in  the  time  of  David — 
this  kind  of  poetical  composition  became  very  popular,  and 
found  many  friends.  Hymns,  epopees  and  prayers  were  com- 
posed, not  only  for  the  tabernacle,  but  for  numerous  occasions. 
This  favorite  literature  did  not  terminate  with  David,  it  was 
continued  to  a  very  late  date.  The  compilers  of  the  Bible 
saved  for  us  one  hundred  and  fifty  chapters  of  the  numerous 
productions  of  that  nature. 

The  Solomonic  productions  can  be  ascribed  to  that  king  with 
historical  certainty,  as  he  is  mentioned  in  history  as  a  promi- 
nent author,  of  whom  we  possess  but  two  books.  The  Song  of 
Songs,  as  it  is  called  in  the  original  text,  is  a  collection  of 
love  songs  composed  by  the  juvenile  Solomon.  Those  poems 
have  no  connection  with  each  other.  The  commentators,  both 
ancient  and  modern,  have  in  vain  wasted  their  time  to  find  in 
that  production  any  other  meaning  but  the  tender  affections  of 
a  youthful  and  loving  heart ;  or  to  bring  the  detached  poems 
into  a  connection  that  might  form  a  unity.  The  head  of  the  book 
states  clear  enough  that  it  is  a  song  of  songs,  collected  in  one 
volume  on  account  of  having  one  author,  and  treating  on  the 
same  sentiments. 

The  second  book  of  Solomon,  that  has  reached  us,  is  the 
Book  of  Proverbs,  we  call  it  the  second  book;  for  there  can  be 
no  doubt,  that  the  Song  of  Songs  was  composed  when  the  wise 
king  was  yet  a  youthful  admirer  of  female  beauty,  with  a  heart 

*  Compare  Psalms  lxxx,  2,  3,  with  Judges  i,  22. 


408  APPENDIX    TO 

full  of  glowing  passions,  which  were  expressed  in  beautiful 
poems;  while  the  style  and  contents  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs 
indicate  the  mature  age  of  the  author.  The  book  is  divided 
into  three  distinct  parts,  the  first  of  which  embraces  the  first 
nine  chapters;  the  second  part  embraces  the  fifteen  chapters 
from  x  to  xxiv,  and  the  third  part  embraces  five  chapters,  from 
xxv  to  xxix,  to  which  are  affixed  the  poems  of  Agur  (xxx),  and 
of  Lemuel  (xxxi).  The  first  two  divisions  commence  plainly 
with  the  words,  "  Proverbs  of  Solomon,"  to  which  is  added  in 
the  first  division  "  Son  of  David,  king  of  Israel."  The  third 
division  commences,  "  Also,  these  are  proverbs  of  Solomon 
which  the  men  of  Hezekiah,  king  of  Jehu dah,  collected."  Here, 
we  have  plain  dates  for  this  book.  The  first  division  was 
written  either  before  Solomon  mounted  the  throne  of  David  or 
shortly  after,  when  the  name  of  the  author  was  not  yet  as 
popular  as  it  subsequently  became,  and  so  he  was  obliged  to 
add  to  his  name,  "  Son  of  David,  king  of  Israel."  The  second 
division  was  written  at  a  later  period  when  his  name  was  well 
known  as  an  author,  wherefore  it  plainly  commences,  "  Proverbs 
of  Solomon."  The  head  of  the  third  division,  mentioning  the 
men  of  Hezekiah  as  the  compilers,  plainly  indicates  that  the 
first  two  divisions  existed  previous  to  the  latter.  A  short 
investigation  of  the  contents  of  the  three  divisions  will  conduct 
us  to  the  same  historical  result.  The  first  division  of  our  book 
is  erroneously  called  Proverbs,  for  it  contains  few,  if  any,  pro- 
verbs. The  Hebrew  term  ^D,  may  be  rendered,  parables,  or 
poems,  just  as  well  as  proverbs.  It  is  a  book  on  wisdom,  as 
the  highest  good  which  man  may  obtain  in  this  sublunary 
world,  which  is  the  cause  of  virtue  and  happiness,  and, 
conducive  to  true  religion  and  piety,  which  are  closely  con- 
nected with  wisdom  and  happiness,  as  folly,  crime,  misery 
and  impiety  are  the  links  of  one  chain.  "Wisdom  is  per- 
sonified as  a  virtuous  and  faithful  wife,  while  folly  is 
represented  as  a  vicious  and  faithless  consort.  These  per- 
sonifications are  characteristic  of  the  period  in  which  these 
chapters  were  written.  Woman  was  regarded  as  superior  in 
wisdom  and  eloquence  to  man.     Saul  questions  a  woman  about 


PERIOD    III.  409 

his  future ;  Abigail  prevents  David  from  the  commission  of  an 
act,  which,  as  she  justly  remarked,  would  have  been  a  disgrace 
to  his  name  and  an  obstacle  in  his  way  to  the-  throne;  Michal 
saved  David  by  a  cunning  contrivance  of  her  own;  Joab,  in 
order  to  persuade  the  king  to  recall  his  son,  resorted  to  the 
assistance  of  a  wise  and  eloquent  woman  of  Tekoa;  and  the 
insurrection  of  Shebawas  brought  to  a  close  by  the  contrivance 
of  another  wise  woman.  These  facts  sufficiently  prove,  that^ 
exalted  notions  were  then  entertained  of  the  intellect  and 
eloquence  of  woman,  which  notions  resound  in  the  personifica- 
tions of  Solomon,  in  the  first  division  of  our  book.  The  inspired 
poet,  who  had  celebrated  his  ardent  love  in  the  beautiful  songs 
collected  in  the  Song  of  Songs,  now  turned  his  lofty  imagina- 
tion and  brilliant  ingenuity  towards  another  goddess,  wisdom, 
which  he  worshiped;  and  this  noble  genius  of  humanity  be- 
comes in  his  phantasy  an  accomplished  and  virtuous  woman. 
It  was  but  one  step  forward:  he  proceeded  from  the  beautiful 
form,  which  he  celebrated  in  the  Song  of  Songs,  to  the  mental 
excellencies  of  woman,  as  he  had  changed  his  theme  from  love 
to  wisdom;  but,  still,  the  same  lyric  beauty,  the  same  sublimity 
of  style,  the  same  profundity  of  sentiment,  and  frequently  also 
the  same  words  *  characterize  those  two  kindred  productions 
of  Solomon;  so  that  it  admits  of  no  doubt,  that  the  first  nine 
chapters  of  Proverbs  were  written  shortly  after  the  poems 
composing  the  Song  of  Songs,  when  Solomon  was  yet  quite  young. 
The  contents  of  this  division  of  Proverbs  is  another  testi- 
mony to  our  hypothesis.  While  he  describes  in  the  first  chapter 
— from  1  to  6  is  a  mere  introduction — the  misery  originating  from 
the  neglect  of  wisdom,  he  continues,  in  the  second  chapter,  to 
describe  the  consequence  of  the  attainment  of  wisdom,  the 
highest  of  which  is  to  comprehend  the  fear  of  the  Lord — which 
was  an  expression  for  the  eminence  of  piety,  and  which  it  must 
be  remembered,  Moses  characterized  as  the  utmost  which  God 
required  of  Israel  {Dent,  x,  12) — to  keep  on  the  path  of  justice 
and  piety;  to  guard  against  superstition,  perversion  and  vice, 
which  conduct  to  death  and  destruction.  After  he  had  remarked 

*  Proverbs  v,  19-,  vii,  1C-1S. 


410  APPENDIX    TO 

in  the  beginning  of  the  third  chapter,  that  wisdom  must  be 
accompanied  by  piety  and  charity,  he  continues  to  describe  the 
consequences  of  wisdom.  It  brings  wealth,  a  long  and  happy 
life,  and  peace;  it  makes  fearless  in  the  hour  of  danger,  and 
brings  fame  and  glory,  to  which  end  is  the  whole  of  the  fourth 
chapter.  With  the  fifth  chapter  a  new  section  begins,  in  which 
he  first  describes  how  wisdom  guards  against  the  illusions  of 
vice  and  leads  to  the  pleasant  embrace  of  virtue,  to  industry 
(chapter  vi),  which  connected  with  wisdom  is  another  guardian 
angel  against  vice,  which  he  describes  most  powerfully  in  the 
seventh  chapter.  The  eighth  and  ninth  chapters  concluding 
this  division,  contains  a  song  which  wisdom  sings  in  its  own 
praise,  where  all  excellencies,  both  divine  and  human,  are 
ascribed  to  the  power  of  wisdom.  If  we  cast  a  glance  upon 
the  dream  of  Solomon  (I  Kings  iii,  5-14),  we  will  find  there 
either  the  prototype  or  the  epitome  of  these  nine  chapters. 
Solomon  required  wisdom  in  order  to  be  able  to  dispense  justice 
among  his  people.  That  wisdom  is  conducive  to  this  end  is 
plainly  stated  (Proverbs  viii,  15,  16).  He  required  wisdom 
to  be  able  to  distinguish  good  from  evil.  This  sentiment  per- 
vades the  whole  of  the  nine  chapters  under  consideration. 
Wealth  and  glory,  the  consequences  of  wisdom,  are  granted  to 
Solomon  in  the  same  dream.  These  we  have 'also  noticed  in 
Proverbs  as  the  consequences  of  wisdom.  The  dream  concludes 
with  the  declaration,  that  his  days  would  be  prolonged,  if  he 
would  observe  the  laws  of  the  Lord.  This  idea  is  also  a  lead- 
ing one  in  Proverbs.* 

It  is  therefore  evident,  either  that  this  division  of  Proverbs 
was  written  in  consequence  of  that  dream,  or  the  dream  was 
a  consequence  of  the  active  imagination  and  the  glowing 
devotion  of  the  poet  to  his  favorite  goddess,  toisdom.  The 
idea  expressed  in  the  dream  and  the  first  division  of  Proverbs, 
was  a  new  and  dangerous  one.  It  set  aside  the  necessity 
of  prophets  and  of  the  urim  to  consult  God  on  occasions  of 
particular  importance.  Wisdom  to  comprehend  the  law  of 
God,  was  regarded  as  all-sufficient  to  govern  the  nation,  to  dis- 

*  Proverbs  iii,  1,  2,  11-18;  ix,  10,  12. 


PERIOD    III.  411 

pense  justice,  and  to  constitute  a  happy,  virtuous  and  pious 
man.  This  is  the  leading  idea  of  that  part  of  Proverbs.  Wis- 
dom of  a  superior  nature  was  granted  to  Solomon ;  consequently, 
he  needed  not  the  advice  of  either  prophet  or  priest,  wherefore 
we  marked  that  dream  as  the  first  step  towards  absolutism . 
If  the  dream  was  a  consequence  of  the  composition  of  those 
chapters  of  Proverbs,  then  they  were  written  before  he 
mounted  the  throne.  Solomon  was  honest  both  in  regard  to 
the  dream  which  he  may  have  had,  and  also  in  regard  to  his 
policy.  It  was  but  the  exaggerated  confidence  he  put  in  his 
personal  wisdom,  which  made  him  an  unhappy  and  despotic 
king.  But  if  these  chapters  were  written  in  defense  of  an 
alleged  dream,  as  the  author  of  the  first  three  chapters  of  Kings 
appears  to  have  believed,  then  Solomon  was  a  shrewd,  calcu- 
lating and  cunning  man,  who  defiled  the  eminence  of  poetical 
and  intellectual  powers  for  which  he  was  distinguished,  to  the 
mean  purpose  of  subjecting  the  people  to  his  own  will  and 
designs.  But,  however,  this  may  be,  it  is  established  that  the 
first  division  of  Proverbs  was  written,  either  shortly  before  or 
soon  after  he  mounted  the  throne  of  David. 

The  second  division  of  Proverbs  is  altogether  different  from 
the  first  one.  It  is  a  proverbial  philosophy  without  any  en- 
deavor at  beauty  or  poetical  charm.  All  the  relations  between 
man  and  man,  the  moral,  civil,  political,  commercial,  and  all 
religious  relations  are  not  merely  touched  upon,  but  the  soundest 
maxims,  the  best  rules  of  conduct  are  prescribed  in  such  short 
terms,  that  it  is  easy  to  keep  them  in  memory.  Every  verse 
is  a  prolific  theme,  on  which  chapters  might  be  written,  yet 
few  of  the  verses  contain  in  the  original  more  than  six  or  seven 
words;  scarcely  any  exceed  eight  words.  The  most  general 
form  is,  that  the  first  part  of  the  verse  consists  of  four  words, 
and  the  latter  part  of  three  words.  The  last  part  of  the  verse 
forms  almost  always  a  contrast  of  sense  to  the  first  part,  which 
enforces  the  maxim  contained  in  the  first  part  of  the  verse,  as 
the  shade  elevates  the  light  of  a  picture.  This  method  of  ar- 
rangement is  peculiar  to  this  book.  The  parallelism  of  other 
Hebrew  poems  is  so  constructed,  that  the  second  line  is  a  sup- 
plement to  the  sense  of  the  first,   so  that  it  may  properly  be 


112  APPENDIX  TO 

called  a  rhyme  of  sentiment  instead  of  sounds.  This  novelty 
through  the  whole  division  is  no  mean  testimony  to  the  inge- 
nuity and  skill  of  Solomon.  The  leading  ideas  are  not  new. 
His  views  on  the  fear  of  the  Lord,  wisdom,  honor,  glory, 
wealth  and  happiness,  are  nearly  the  same  as  in  the  first  divi- 
sion. The  maxims  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  are  applied  to 
all  the  relations  of  life;  industry  and  honesty  are  highly 
praised,  and  all  the  chords  of  the  human  heart  are  skillfully 
touched.  The  second  part  of  Proverbs  appears  to  us  to  be  the 
most  valuable  of  all  the  post-Mosaic  writings ;  and  we  know 
of  no  work  in  ancient  or  modern  literature  that  contains  more 
sound  matter  or  more  valuable  verities  in  so  small  a  space.  It 
is  every  way  calculated  to  reconcile  one  to  Solomon  notwith- 
standing his  many  imperfections.  That  one  man  should  be 
thus  acquainted  with  all  circumstances  of  human  life,  seems 
almost  a  matter  of  impossibility.  It  appears  to  us,  that  Solo- 
mon collected  the  proverbs  which  circulated  among  the  people, 
and  combined  them  with  his  own.  We  may  therefore  properly 
call  it  a  proverbial  philosophy,  a  book  of  the  people  and  for 
the  people;  one  which  enables  us  to  judge  of  the  high  state  of 
civilization  of  Israel  at  that  age. 

The  last  division  of  Proverbs  is  a  gleaning  of  the  Solomonic 
compositions.  This  is  especially  remarked  and  is  visible  in 
the  style  and  form  of  the  proverbs,  many  of  which  are  embo- 
died in  the  former  division.  The  style  is  not  as  concise  as  in 
the  preceding  parts,  nor  is  the  same  form  observed  through  the 
collection.  It  can  not  be  ascertained  when  chapter  xxx  was 
written,  although  it  has  all  the  characteristics  of  an  ancient 
composition.  Chapter  xxxi,  before  which  a  fictitious  name  is 
set,  is  undoubtedly  an  address  to  king  Solomon  denouncing 
luxury  and  bigamy,  both  of  which  must  have  been  odious  to 
the  nation.  The  author  succeeds  well  in  describing  an  indus- 
trious, wise  and  faithful  wife,  which  he  contrasts,  at  the 
conclusion,  with  the  vanity  of  beauty.  This  kind  of  Hebrew 
literature  did  not  end  with  Solomon,  We  find  continuations  of 
it  it  in  almost  all  periods  of  this  history.* 

*  Vide  L.  Dukes  Rabbinische  Blumenlese.     Leipzig   1844. 


PERIOD     III, 


413 


The  literature  of  this  period  indicates  a  slow  and  regular 
progress.  The  heroic  age  was  also  that  of  poetry  and  music. 
The  Israelites  were  the  nation  of  Jehovah.  This  exalted  idea 
was  never  forgotten;  and  so  the  current  of  poesy  flows  in  the 
same  direction.  The  Psalms,  expressing  as  their  chief  charac- 
teristics, almost  every  relation  between  God  and  man,  an  un- 
paralleled confidence  in,  as  well  as  a  glowing  devotion  and  ar- 
dent love  to  God,  were  the  eminent  productions  of  that  era. 

The  era  of  poetry  was  followed  by  the  age  of  philosophy,  as 
among  all  nations  of  antiquity.  Solomon  worshiped  at  the 
altar  of  wisdom. 

The  philosophical  productions  of  the  age  were  not  reduced 
to  scientific  forms;  they  appear  in  the  fresh  and  flowery  gar- 
ment of  poesy.  What  had  been  in  former  ages  matter  of 
presentment  became  now  matter  of  consciousness.  The  spirit 
of  research  endeavored  to  explore  the  whole  field  of  sentiment 
and  faith,  having  only  intellect  as  its  guide.  We  see  no  longer 
before  us  a  youthful  nation  living  in  a  world  of  sentiments, 
consciousness  and  rational  conviction  covered  the  field  of  the 
mind;  the  spirit  was  emancipated  and  manly;  but  with  the 
victory  of  wisdom  we  see  united  the  decline  of  the  prophets, 
who  had  scarcely  any  influence  in  the  days  of  Solomon.  What 
influence  this  progress  exercised  upon  the  neighboring  and 
depending  countries  may  be  easily  imagined.  We  shall  take 
notice  of  it  in  the  next  period,  when  meeting  with  the  conse- 
quences of  that  influence.  We  have  not  done  full  justice  to 
the  literature  of  this  period;  but  our  space  does  not  permit  us 
to  enter  more  at  length  upon  the  subject,  which  would  require 
an  additional  volume.  We  had  only  to  ascertain  their  histori- 
cal data. 


P  E  B I  0  D    IV 


FROM  THE  DIVISION  OF  THE  EMPIRE  INTO  THE 
KINGDOMS  OF  JUDAH  AND  ISRAEL  TO  THE  FALL 
OF  SAMARIA    (2792—3039  A.  M.    968—721  B.  C.). 


BIBLICAL    CHRONOLOGY. 


Kings  of  Judah. 

Kings 

of 

Israel. 

Years. 

Years 

Rehabeam,     - 

17 

Jerobeam,    - 

- 

- 

- 

22 

Abiam,     - 

3 

Nadab      - 

- 

- 

- 

2 

Baesha 

- 

- 

- 

23 

Asa,       - 

41 

Elah,        - 

- 

- 

- 

2 

Zimri.  seven  days. 

Jehoshaphat  or 

Civil   war  between  Thibni 

Josbaphat,  - 

25 

and  Omri, 

- 

- 

- 

4 

Omri, 

- 

- 

- 

7 

Ahab, 

- 

- 

- 

21 

Jeboram  or  Joram.    - 

8 

Ahaziah, 

- 

- 

- 

2 

Ahazariah,    - 

1 

Jehoram,     - 

- 

- 

- 

12 

Atbaliah,    - 

6 

Jehu, 

- 

- 

- 

28 

Jehoasb  or  Joash, 

39 

Jehohaz, 

- 

- 

- 

15 

Amaziah,          - 

17 

Jehoash,  - 

- 

- 

- 

16 

Azariah  or  Uziab, 

52 

Jerobeam  II, 
Zechariah  and 

• 

- 

- 

41 

Jotham,          - 

16 

Shollum 

- 

- 

- 

1 

Ahaz,          - 

16 

Menahem, 

- 

- 

- 

10 

Hezikiah,        - 

6 

Pekahiah, 

- 

- 

- 

2 

and  twenty  three  years 

Pekah, 

- 

- 

- 

20 

after  this. 

Assyrian  dominion, 

- 

- 

10 

Hosheath,    - 

- 

- 

- 

9 

kings  and  one  queen. 

247 

20    kings 

- 

- 

- 

247 

CHAPTER    X.  415 


CHAPTER  X. 

FROM   JEROBEAM   AND  REHABEAM  TO   THE  EXPIRATION   OF 
THE  OMRI  DYNASTY.     (90S— 873  B.  C.) 

Eighty  years  ago  the  unhappy  house  of  Saul  struggled  against 
the  spirited  hero,  whose  grandson  now  saved  his  life  by  flight 
from  Shechem — giving  rise  to  the  eighty-ninth  psalm — which 
he  most  likely  intended  to  make  his  capital,  in  order  to  satisfy 
the  disaffected  sons  of  Ephraim.  The  heir  of  David  stood  now 
opposed  by  the  prophets,  rejected  by  the  ten  tribes — Menassah 
must  be  counted  as  two  tribes,  as  it  really  was  according  to 
territory;  for  it  is  evident  that  Simeon  was  counted  with  Je- 
huda,  having  no  separate  territorial  existence — and  threatened 
with  an  invasion  from  Egypt.  Still  Rehabeam's  power  was 
not  as  insignificant  as  might  be  supposed.  He  was  in  pos- 
session of  the  national  and  of  the  royal  private  treasures ;  of  the 
Idumean  seaports,  which  were  a  source  of  wealth,  and  of  a  rich 
and  well  cultivated  land,  crowded  with  a  numerous  population, 
so  that  he  was  able  to  muster  an  army  of  one  hundred  and 
eighty  thousand  men  (Kings  xii,  21),  a  force  strong  enough  to 
hold  in  subjection  Edom  and  Phelistia,  which  he  maintained, 
and  to  maintain  the  independence  of  the  land  in  opposition  to 
Jerobeam  and  others.  He  sat  upon  an  established  throne, 
which  was  guarded  by  the  loyalty  of  his  subjects,  and  by  the 
priests  and  Levites  throughout  the  country,  who  were  na- 
turally drawn  towards  the  center  of  their  power  and  splendor, 
which  was  the  temple  of  Jerusalem. 

Not  quite  so  favorable  was  the  position  of  Jerobeam.  He 
was  far  superior  to  his  rival  in  numerical  strength — as  two 
to  one  (II  Chron.  xiii,  3)  in  the  extent  of  territory,  being 
in  possession  of  Ammon  and  Moab,  and  as  it  appears,  in  the 
sequel,  also  in  mental  energies.  Still  Jerobeam  was  without 
material  means,  he  had  no  disciplined  army  and  no  organized 
government ;  he  had  a  new  and  fomenting  people  that  expected 
a  new  organization  from  his   hands.     Besides  these  disadvan- 


416  PERIOD     IV. 

tages  he  had  in  his  territory  a  vast  number  of  priests  and 
Levites,  who  were  opposed  to  a  separation  from  the  house  of 
David,  and  there  were,  most  certainly,  many  more  friends  of 
the  Davidian  dynasty  among  the  ten  tribes,  who  were  not 
favorably  disposed  towards  the  new  king.  Under  such  cir- 
cumstances, Jerobeam  could  not  enforce  his  authority  in  Judah 
by  arms.  Had  Rehabeam  executed  his  intended  invasion  of 
the  ten  tribes,  little  doubt  can  be  entertained  as  to  the  defeat 
of  Jerobeam.  But  the  intention  of  Rehabeam  was  frustrated, 
as  we  have  remarked  before,  by  the  energetical  interference 
of  the  prophets,  who  supported  their  favorite  Jerobeam,  whom 
they  justly  acknowledged  the  legal  king  of  Israel.  Both  mo- 
narchs,  therefore,  were  obliged  to  maintain  the  peace,  although 
occasional  hostilities  of  little  importance  could  not  be  pre- 
vented, which  most  likely  now  and  then  occurred  on  the 
frontiers.  They  directed  their  sole  attention  to  the  mainten- 
ance of  the  statu  quo,  to  which  end  Jerobeam  fortified  and 
aggrandized  the  ancient  city  of  Joshua,  Shechcm,  and  in  the 
provinces  beyond  Jordan  he  fortified  Penuel  in  order  to  secure 
his  authority  in  that  part  of  the  country,  from  which  side 
alone,  Amnion  and  Moab  could  be  held  in  subjection.  He 
himself  took  up  his  residence  in  Tirzah,  of  Menasseh,  almost 
in  the  center  of  his  territory.  Rehabeam  on  his  part,  fortified 
and  garrisoned  fifteen  cities,  so  that  an  invasion  by  Jerobeam 
would  have  been  ineffectual. 

The  policy  of  Rehabeam  was  of  such  a  nature  that  he  could 
expect  to  succeed  gradually  in  winning  again  the  affections  of 
the  people.  He  married  daughters  of  the  house  of  Jesse,  only 
knowing  that  his  father's  marriage  of  foreign  wcmen  gave 
offence  to  the  people.  He  conferred  all  the  privileges  of  a 
favorite  queen  upon  a  granddaughter  of  Absalom,  and  he  also 
promised  to  her  son  the  royal  power  (II  Chron.  xi,  22);  know- 
ing that  the  memory  of  Absalom  was  yet  dear  to  many  an 
Israelite.  He  maintained  the  splendor  of  the  temple,  and  its 
ministers,  in  order  to  attract  the  picus  to  the  capital,  in  which 
plan  he  actually  succeeded.  The  military  pomp,  too,  which 
most  likely  was  displayed  in  the  frontier  cities,  was  attractive. 


CHAPTER   X.  417 

Jerobeam  and  his  friends  must  have  observed  the  imminent 
danger  threatening  them  from   the  peaceful  policy  of  Judah, 
and   measures    were   taken    to   render  it  ineffectual.      Those 
measures   existed  in  changing  the  national  religion,    deposing 
the  tribe  of  Levi  from  the  sacerdotal  oiliees,   and  engaging  the 
assistance  of  Egypt.      Jerobeam  had  lived  in  the    capital   of 
Egypt ;  there  he  had  seen  the  pomp  and  splendor  of  Egyptian 
worship,  audits  influence  upon  the  people,  who  willingly  bowed 
down  before  the  priests,  the  strongholds  of  the  throne.     He 
found  that  worship  best  calculated  to  political  purposes.     Be- 
sides this,  it  was  to  the  interest  of  Jerobeam  to  secure  to  his 
cause  the  friendship  of  Egypt,  and  there  was  no  surer  way  to 
secure  the  affections  of  an  ancient  nation,  than  by  adopting  its 
form  of  worship.     Two  temples  were  erected,  one  in  Dan,   the 
extreme  north  of  the  Israelitish  territory,  and  one  in  Beth  El, 
the   extreme  south  of  the  land;  in  which  golden  calves  were 
set  up.     There  can  be  no  doubt,  that  both  temples  and  idols 
were  on  the  Egyptian  plan;  for  the  author  of  I  Kings  xii,  28, 
lets  Jerobeam  say  the  same  words,  as  were  once  exclaimed  in 
the  wilderness,  when  the  golden  calf  was  made  (Exodus  xxxii, 
4).     "  Behold  thy  gods,  0  Israel,  which  have  brought  thee  up 
from  the  land  of  Egypt,"  to  which  the  author  of  II  Chronicles 
adds,  that  they  also  worshipped  the  Saeerim  (xi,  15),   which 
deities  were  also  opposed  by  Moses,  as  Egyptian  corruptions 
(Levit.  xvii,  7).*     The  staunch   opponents  of  Jerobeam,   the 
Levites,  were  removed,  and  the   sacred  offices  were  given  to 
men  of  the  people,  which  brought  to  the  king  many  influential 
friends,  while  it  took  away  the  power  of  his  enemies,  many  of 
whom  emigrated  to  Judah.     He  postponed  the  feast  of  booths 
to  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  eighth  month,  while  it  was  observed 
in  Judah  on  the  same  day  of  the  seventh  month,  in  order  to 
effect  a  decided  separation  from  Judah.     He  interdicted  then 

*  The  term  Saeerim  is  erroneously  rendered  Devils,  or  Evil  Sjririts;  while 
this  term,  whenever  occuring  in  the  Bible,  i3  rendered  Goats  or  Rams, 
and  it  is  well  known,  that  the  ox  and  the  cow  were  sacred  to  Isis,  the  rarr; 
was  sacred  to  Jupiter  Amnion,  and  Pan,  was  venerated  at  Mendis,  by  the 
symbol  of  a  goat..    Neither  of  those  gods  was  considered  an  evil  spirit. 

27 


418  PERIOD     IV. 

going  to  Jerusalem  according  to  the  Mosaic  command,  which 
he  knew  to  be  one  of  the  chief  bonds  of  the  national  union. 
This  interdiction  is  strongly  condemned  in  three  beautiful 
psalms,  which  appear  to  have  originated  at  that  time  with  one 
of  the  poets  living  on  the  banks  of  Jordan.  We  mean  Psalms 
xlii,  xliii,  and  lxxxiv,  in  which  the  poet  pours  forth  a  current 
of  offended  sentiment  about  the  interrogation  of  his  neighbors, 
"Where  are  thy  gods,"  relating  to  the  proclamation  of  Jero- 
beam,  quoted  above.  His  complaints  equal  those  of  Philomele; 
his  longing  to  appear  before  God,  to  see  his  temple  and  his 
altar;  his  recollections  of  the  past  when  he  went  in  joyous 
processions  to  the  temple,  are  truly  affectionate  and  indicative 
of  a  sensitive  and  severely  offended  heart.  The  hopes  which 
he  entertains  for  the  future,  and  which  uphold  his  declining 
life,  are  pious,  confident  and  noble.  Sentimental  as  is  the 
author  of  the  two  first  mentioned  psalms,  still  he  can  not  help 
calling  his  people  an  impious  nation,  and  Jerobeam  a  cunning 
and  violent  man  (xliii,  1).  The  author  of  Psalm  lxxxiv,  says, 
"  0  Jehovah,  Lord  of  hosts,  hear  my  prayer;  give  ear  0  God 
of  Jacob.  Selah.  Behold,  0  God  our  shield  (the  union)  and 
look  upon  the  face  of  thy  Messiah  (Rehabeam).  For  a  day  in 
thy  courts  (the  temple  of  Jerusalem)  is  better  than  a  thousand; 
I  had  rather  be  a  doorkeeper  in  the  house  of  my  God  than  to 
dwell  firmly  in  the  tents  of  wickedness  "  (the  temples  of  Jero- 
beam). The  measures  of  Jerobeam  are  sufficiently  justifiable 
in  point  of  policy.  In  regard  to  religion  his  schism  was  not 
as  violent  as  it  is  generally  supposed  to  have  been.  Moses 
retained  many  Egyptian  symbols  and  customs,  as  has  been 
mentioned  before.  Solomon,  too,  not  only  retained  the  Mosaic 
symbols,  but  also  added  symbols  of  the  Zabians.  The  wor- 
ship of  Jerusalem  was  symbolical,  and  besides  the  hymns  and 
choruses  of  the  Levites,  nothing  but  symbols  and  emblems, 
and  typical  ceremonies,  in  which  the  people  could  take  no 
active  part,  constituted  the  solemn  rites.  The  unquestionable 
sanctity  of  the  temple  could  not  have  yet  been  established  at 
that  time,  because  little  more  than  thirty  years  had  elapsed 
since  its  dedication,    and  such  a  short  time  is  by  no  means 


CHAPTER   X.  419 

sufficient  to  give  to  a  place  that  sanctity,  which  the  temple 
had  in  after  ages.  Moses  made  use  of  Egyptian  symbols  to 
express  the  ideas  of  true  religion,  to  lead  the  people  from  the 
gods  of  the  heathens  to  the  worship  of  Jehovah.  Solomon 
adopted  the  same  plan  to  the  same  end.  Jerobeam,  too, 
adopted  the  same  plan  to  dissolve  the  union  of  Israel  and  to 
secure  himself  on  his  throne.  The  symbols  were  changed,  but 
not  the  ideas.  The  marked  influence  of  the  prophets  upon  the 
kings  and  people  of  Israel  in  all  epochs  of  their  history,  even 
in  the  time  of  Ahab,  and  also  upon  foreign  nations;  the  facts 
that  the  land  of  Israel  was  always  called  the  land  of  Jehovah;* 
that  no  immoral  practices  connected  with  idolatry  were  intro- 
duced by  Jerobeam;  and  that  the  anger  of  the  prophets  was 
especially  aroused  against  Ahab  for  his  introduction  of  Tyrian 
gods,  are  sufficient  to  show,  that  but  the  symbols  and  not  the 
fundamental  ideas  were  changed.  It  was  but  an  external  and 
no  internal  change  of  religion,  When  the  temple  of  Jerusalem 
could  boast  of  occupying  the  classical  spot  of  Mount  Moriah; 
the  temple  of  Jerobeam  in  Beth  El  could  point  back  to  father 
Jacob,  who  sanctified  that  spot  to  become  a  house  of  the  Lord, 
which  undoubtedly  exercised  a  considerable  influence  upon  the 
minds  of  many,  wherefore  the  principal  feast  was  celebrated  at 
Beth  El.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  Jerobeam  found  plenty 
of  false  prophets  to  advocate  and  sanction  the  schism.  The 
people  were  led  by  the  practices  of  Solomon  to  regard  such 
changes  less  seriously  than  the  prophets  did;  religion  had  be- 
come with  them  more  an  internal  than  external  affair,  as 
many  psalms  and  the  Proverbs  clearly  indicate ;  consequently 
external  changes  did  not  materially  affect  them;  besides,  the 
new  symbols  must  have  been  considered  but  a  slight  change 
from  the  old  ones.  To  this  must  be  added  the  political  fanati- 
cism, which  is  by  no  means  milder  than  the  religious  one;  all 
the  wrongs  of  which  the  Davidian  dynasty  was  guilty,  the 
illegal  obstinacy  of  Judah  against  the  overwhelming  majority 
of  the  nation,  and  the  violation  of  the  law  involved  therein, 

*  I  Kings  xx,  23-28;  II  Kings  xvii,  24-34. 


420  PERIOD    IV. 

were  certainly  enough  to  incite  political  fanaticism — the  con- 
ciousness  of  being  right  in  political  respects,  and  the  example 
which  Solomon  had  set  and  which  the  elders  of  Jehudah  had 
imitated  to  violate  the  law.  It  must  therefore  be  confessed, 
that  the  seism  of  Jerobeam,  was  neither  a  violent  transition, 
nor  a  despotic  measure;  it  was  but  an  alteration  of  the  law, 
and  most  likely  with  the  consent  of  the  majority  of  Israel. 
There  can  be  no  doubt,  that  many  adhered  to  the  temple  of 
Jerusalem,  but  they  were  in  the  minority. 

The  prophets,  oi:f  their  part,  could  not  consent   to  the  mea- 
sures of  Jerobeam,  although  they  never  declared  in  favor  of 
any  kind  of  external  ceremonies,  or  of  the  temple  of  Jerusa- 
lem and  its  ministers,  and  had  themselves  deserted  the  house 
of  David  ;  for  their  policy  was  to  maintain  the  union  of  Israel 
by    no    other  means    than    by    the    laws    of   Moses.      They 
could  easily  forsee  the  conduct  of  Rehabeam,  who  would  not  be 
able  to  play  the  hypocrite  for  a  long  time,  but  would  soon 
worship    foreign    gods;    such   an    occurrence,    had  Jerobeam 
remained  firm  in  the  law,  would  have  afforded  them   ample 
chance,   to  carry  out  the  determinations   of  the  majority  in 
regard  to  the  crown,  to  give  satisfaction  to  the  law,  and  to 
reunite   the  house  of  Israel.     Besides  this,  the  schism  of  Jero- 
beam was  not  a  transitory  one ;  the  close  connection  of  the  new 
worship  with  the  laws  of  Moses  threatened  to  produce  a  more 
lasting  breach  in  Israel,  as  it  indeed  proved  to  be,  than  if  he 
had  been  more  inclined  to  idolatry,  which  would  have  met  with 
the    dissatisfaction   of  the    people.     The    prophets     strongly 
denounced  the  policy  of  Jerobeam,  as  they  naturally  must  have 
done,  and  to  which  they  were  fully  entitled;  for  besides   the 
lasting  disunion  of  Israel  which  that  policy  threatened,  it  was 
a  violation  of  the  laws  under  which  Jerobeam  was  elected  to 
the  throne,  and  of  the  express  condition  under  which  the  crown 
was  given  him.      "And  it   shall  come  to  pass,  if  thou  will 
hearken  to  all  which  I  command  thee,  and  thou  wilt  walk  in 
my  ways,  and  thou   wilt   do  what  is  right  in  my  sight,  to 
observe  my  statutes  and  my  commandments,  as  David  my  ser- 
vant has  done;  then  I  will  be  with  thee,  and   I  will  build  up 


CHAPTER    X.  421 

to  thee  a  faithful  house,  as  I  have  built  to  David,  and  I  will 
give  Israel  to  thee."  Such  were  the  conditions  under  which 
Ahiah  offered  the  crown  to  Jerobeam;  and  there  it  is  said  in 
unquestionable  terms,  that  Jeroboam's  duty  was  to  adhere 
incessantly  to  the  laws  of  the  nation,  in  default  of  which  his 
heirs  forfeited  their  claims  to  the  throne,  as  the  heir  of  Solo- 
mon had  on  account  of  his  father's  conduct.  And,  therefore, 
the  same  Ahiah  who  offered  the  crown  to  Jerobeam,  also  told 
him,  that  the  claims  of  his  sons  were  forfeited  on  account  of 
his  illegal  conduct. 

Rehabeam,  as  has  been  suggested,  could  maintain  his  hypo- 
critical policy  for  no  longer  time  than  three  years ;  then  he 
followed  the  example  of  his  father  and  the  advice  of  his  mother, 
Naamah  of  Amnion,  and  not  only  worshiped  the  foreign  gods, 
but  also  indulged  in  the  debauchery  connected  with  the  worship 
of  Astarte,  so  that  soon  Sodomites  and  demoralized  idolaters 
filled  the  capital.  The  immoral  practices,  which  were  so  much 
opposed  by  the  laws  of  Moses  were  so  extensively  intro- 
duced, that  even  the  author  of  I  Chronicles  is  bound  to  admit, 
that  Rehabeam  and  all  Israel  with  him,  forsook  the  law  of  the 
Lord.  If  the  conduct  of  Jerobeam  was  calculated  to  give  dis- 
satisfaction to  the  prophets  and  their  party,  who  were  by  no 
means  inconsiderable  both  in  Israel  and  Judah,  the  conduct  of 
Rehabeam  must  have  appeared  to  them  outrageous  and  insuf- 
ferable. It  is  therefore  not  difficult  to  say  how  Shishak  or 
Sesostris  II,  or  Shishank  (being  the  same  personage),  king  of 
Egypt,  came  to  invade  Judah.  The  opposition  of  that  king  to 
the  aged  Solomon,  his  friendship  to  Jerobeam,  the  endeavor  of 
the  latter  to  please  Pharaoh,  and  the  necessary  hatred  of  the 
party  of  the  prophets  against  Rehabeam,  leave  no  doubt,  that 
Shishak  was  invited  by  Jerobeam,  with  the  consent  of  the 
party  of  the  prophets,  as  it  appears  clearly  from  the  words  of 
Shemaiah  (II  Chro::.  xii,  5),  with  a  view  to  restore  the  union 
of  Israel,  which  gave  to  the  party  of  the  prophets  the  hopes  of 
seeing,  also,  the  Mosaic  rites  reestablished,  as  they  could 
expect  from  Jerobeam  if  acknowledged  by  the  whole  nation. 
In  the  fifth  year  of  the  reign  of  Rehabeam,  Shishak,  or  Sesos- 


422  PERIOD     IV. 

tris  IT,  invaded  Judah,  leading  a  large  army  of  cavalry,  infant- 
ry, and  chariots.  The  author  of  Chronicles  gives  us  the 
number  of  chariots  twelve  hundred;  and  the  number  of  the 
cavalry  sixty  thousand;  the  number  of  the  infantry  he  did  not 
know.  The  strength  of  the  Egyptian  army  must  have  been 
considerable,  because  it  consisted  not  only  of  Egyptians,  but  also 
of  Ethiopians,  Lybians,  and  Succites,  which  most  likely  were 
the  troglodytes  in  the  east  of  Egypt,  where  the  first  of  the 
encampments  of  Israel  is  called  Succoth.  That  this  king  was 
the  distinguished  Sesostris  II  has  been  ascertained  by  Champol- 
lion,  who  detected  among  the  hieroglyphics,  representing  the 
kings  conquered  in  battle  by  that  Alexander  of  Egypt,  the  tall  and 
beautiful  figure  of  a  man,  on  whose  shield  is  the  inscription 
"  King  of  Judah,"  and  under  the  figure  is  remarked  "  Land  of 
Mountains";  to  this  must  be  added  the  fact,  that  on  the  rocks 
near  Beirut  traces  of  Egyptian  hieroglyphics  are  found,  among 
which,  as  Dr.  Lepsius  says,  the  name  of  Sesostris  is  found  twice. 
No  particulars  of  this  important  fact  have  reached  us.  Still  so 
much  is  evident,  that  it  was  not  so  easy  to  take  Jerusalem,  which 
was  not  only  almost  invincible,  as  the  sequel  will  show,  but 
was  surrounded  by  other  strongly  fortified  places,  which  had 
to  be  reduced  before  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  could  be  under- 
taken; nor  is  it  at  all  likely,  that  such  an  army  as  Rehabeam 
had,  could  be  thus  totally  discomfited  in  one  or  two  battles, 
so  that  Jerusalem  was  taken  in  a  short  time.  We  have  no 
account  in  our  sources  that  Jerusalem  was  taken  at  all  by 
Shishak;  we  only  read  that  "he  went  up  towards  Jerusalem," 
it  is  not  even  mentioned  that  he  beseiged  it.  The  result  of 
the  invasion  we  are  told  was  the  spoliation  of  the  public  and 
private  treasury  of  the  king,  leaving  it  uncertain  whether 
Shishak  took  the  treasures  by  force  or  with  the  consent  of 
Rehabeam.  The  author  of  II  Chronicles  also  informs  us 
(xii.  7,  8.),  that  a  dependency  of  Judah  on  Egypt  wa;  another 
consequence  of  that  invasion,  which,  however,  lasted  only  a 
short  time,  (ibid,  verse  12,)  probably  to  the  death  of  Shishak. 
It  appears  therefore  to  us,  that  Reha  am,  dreading  the  coali- 
tion of  Shishak  and  Jerobeam,  submitte  1  to  the  former,  (ibid 
verse  6,)  and  most  likely  also  convinced  the  Eg^  ptLn  monarch, 


CHAPTER    X.  423 

that  it  was  not  to  the  interest  of  his  country  to  dethrone  Reha- 
beam  in  favor  of  Jerobeam ;  that  the  commerce  of  Egypt  was 
much  more  favored  if  Judah  remained  cut  off  from  Phoenicia ; 
and  that  his  undertaking  could  not  be  brought  to  an  end  in  so 
short  a  time  as  he  might  expect.  Shishak  therefore  consented 
to  accept  an  indemnification  of  the  expedition  and  the  sub- 
mission of  Rehabeam  to  the  superiority  of  Egypt.  That 
indemnification  and  the  subsequent  tribute  which  Rehabeam 
was  obliged  to  pay  to  the  Egyptians,  reduced  the  coffers  of  the 
king  and  the  national  treasury,  to  such  an  extent  that  for  the 
golden  shields  of  Solomon,  made  for  the  body-guard  of  the 
king,  were  substituted  those  of  brass.  It  appears  that  while 
prudence  dictated  that  policy,  circumstances  were  too  threat- 
ening to  allow  Rehabeam  to  enter  upon  active  hostility  against 
an  enemy  powerful  as  Shishak  and  Rehabeam. 

The  sharp  lessons  which  the  son  of  Solomon  had  received 
during,  the  first  part  of  his  reign,  were  not  effective  enough  to 
make  of  him  anything  like  a  good  monarch.  He  continued  to 
spend  his  life  in  a  seraglio  of  eighteen  wives  and  sixty  concu- 
bines, worshiping  Astarte  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  word, 
although  he  did  not  neglect  to  visit  the  temple  regularly  (1 
Kings,  xiv,  28).  Such  a  life  of  sensual  excess  must,  naturally, 
have  made  him  a  weak  and  despotic  ruler,  regarding  neither  law 
nor  justice;  so  that  even  the  author  of  II  Chronicles  is  bound  to 
confess  that  he  was  a  wicked  king,  whose  heart  never  inquired 
after  the  Lord.  How  insane  was  the  obstinacy  of  Judah  and 
the  zeal  of  the  Levites,  supporting  a  dynasty  so  degenerated, 
in  opposition  of  the  laws  and  the  will  of  the  nation,  and  at 
the  expense  to  the  union,  prosperity  and  national  existence  of 
Israel!  The  death  of  Rehabeam  occurred  in  the  eighteenth 
year  of  his  reign,  at  the  age  of  fifty-eight,  after  which  he  was 
entombed  in  the  royal  sepulchre  in  the  City    of  David  (951 

B.   C). 

His  successor,  Abiam,  son  of  Maachah,  the  granddaughter 
of  Absalom,  was  in  no  respect  better  than  his  father.  He 
also  wasted  his  time  and  his  energies  in  a  seraglio,  in  which 
he  held  fourteen  wives ;  and  in  the  service  of  Astarte  and  other 


424  PERIOD     IV. 

foreign  gods,  which  sanctioned  a  life  of  debauchery  and  excess; 
nor  did  he  pay  much  attention  to  the  laws  of  the  land,  or  to 
the  rights  of  the  people.  Still,  he,  like  his  father,  neglected 
not  to  uphold  the  splendor  and  the  pomp  of  the  temple  and  its 
ministers,  as  we  see  by  his  proclamation  sent  to  Israel  before 
the  war,  which  signalized  his  reign,  lasting  only  three  years. 
But,  before  Ave  take  notice  of  that  war,  we  must  continue  to 
review  the  government  of  Jerobeam. 

The  invasion  of  Shishak,  had  entirely  failed  to  realize  the 
expectations  of  Jerobeam,  or  of  the  party  of  the  prophets. 
Jerobeam  afterwards  succeeded  in  establishing  his  throne 
firmly,  and  in  silencing  his  opponents.  The  prophets,  although 
opposed  to  his  policy,  still,  choosing  the  least  of  two  evils, 
must  have  preferred  to  support  the  throne  of  Jerobeam,  before 
that  of  the  corrupt  rulers  of  Judah,  considering  the  former 
the  legitimate  Messiah  of  the  nation.  The  exhaustion  of  the 
national  treasury  of  Jerusalem,  the  unpopularity  and  feebleness 
of  the  deceased  king,  which  he  most  likely  overrated;  the  dis- 
satisfaction of  the  pious  regarding  the  idolatrous  practices  of 
the  king,  were  indeed  favorable  to  the  invasion  of  Judah,  and 
indicative  of  certain  success.  To  this  must  be  added  the  fact, 
that  Jerobeam  was  most  likely  in  close  alliance  with  the  king 
of  Damascus,  who  effected  his  sole  independence  during  the 
political  convulsions  of  Israel,  and  which  Jerobeam  was  obliged 
to  recognize.  Still,  he  did  not  undertake  such  an  invasion 
during  the  administration  of  Reh abeam.  But,  when  that  prince 
was  dead,  the  change  of  government  added  one  more  chance  to 
many  others,  and  Jerobeam  collected  an  army  to  invade  Judah, 
with  the  intention  of  making  himself  master  of  the  throne  of 
Jerusalem,  and  to  reunite  the  nation.  But  it  could  not  be 
expected  that  he  would  renounce  his  schism  in  favor  of  the 
ancient  religion  of  Israel.  It  would  have  been  inconsistent 
and  unlikely  for  Jerobeam,  after  he  had  defended  it  so  many 
years.  This  especially  could  not  have  been  expected,  had  he 
entered  Jerusalem  a  victorious  conqueror.  It  was  much  more 
to  be  feared  that  he  would  have  imposed  his  schism  upon  Judah 
too,  which  the  party  of  the  prophets  wished  to  prevent.   Their 


CHAPTER    X.  425 

hopes  of  a  reunion  of  Israel  under  the  ancient  banner  of  its 
law,  was  deferred  to  a  period  after  the  death  of  Jcrobcam,  and 
to  the  reign  of  a  new  dynasty,  as  we  shall  sec  hereafter.  There- 
fore, when  Jcrobeam  stood  at  the  altar  in  the  temple  of  Beth  El 
burning  incense,  most  likely  the  usual  preparation  for  battle, 
a  prophet  from  Judah  stepped  up  to  him,  and  brought  him  an 
oracle  of  God,  predicting  that  this  altar  would  be  desecrated 
by  sacrificing  upon  it  human  bones  and  burning  upon  it  its  own 
priests,  and  then  the  altar  would  be  overthrown  by  the  son  of 
David — the  name  Joshiah  is  a  later  addition — if  he  invade 
Judah  (I  Kings  xiii,  2,  3).  Jerobeam  felt  offended  by  being 
thus  boldly  confronted,  and  thought  of  punishing  the  fearless 
speaker.  But  he  was  too  well  aware  of  the  danger  of  such  an 
undertaking,  to  do  harm  to  one  of  the  favorites,  and  most 
likely,  to  the  foremost  men  of  a  large,  influential  and  dissatis- 
fied party,  while  being  involved  in  a  foreign  war.  This  is 
beautifully  expressed  in  our  sources,  by  the  "  drying  up  of  the 
king's  arm/'  He  recalled  his  orders  for  the  arrest  of  the  pro- 
phet, who  after  all  refused  to  eat  with  the  king. 

The  army,  with  which  Jerobeam  intended  to  invade  Judah, 
was,  according  to  II  Chronicles,  eight  hundred  thousand 
strong,  which  was  opposed  by  four  hundred  thousand  men  of 
Judah.  These  numbers  are  evidently  exaggerated,  although 
it  maybe  expected  that  Jerobeam  strained  every  nerve  to  make 
himself  master  of  the  whole  land;  and,  on  the  other  side,  it 
was  natural  that  every  exertion  was  made  to  defeat  the  in- 
vader, who  was  considered  an  usurper  and  an  apostate.  Yet, 
there  could  not  have  been  thirteen  hundred  thousand  warriors 
in  active  service ;  for  with  such  a  numerous  army  one  might 
then  have  conquered  all  Asia.  Still,  we  see  Damascus  had 
effected  her  independence,  which  was  undoubtedly  a  serious 
loss;  for  so  Tadmor  and  the  Solomonic  high  road  of  commerce 
were  lost  for  Israel.  It  may  be,  that  so  many  men  could  have 
been  brought  into  the  field,  or  were  really  armed  for  defence,  in 
case  the  war  took  an  unfavorable  turn. 

Abiam,  on  learning  the  intention  of  Jerobeam,  collected  an 
army,  and  occupied  the  northern  region  of  Benjamin;   making 


426  PERIOD    IV. 

his  headquarters  Zemaraim,  near  Beth  El,  where  he  expected 
the  invading  army.  He  sent  a  proclamation  to  the  Israelites, 
in  which  lie  asserted  his  dynastical  rights  to  be  still  in  force 
though  his  father  was  unable  to  chastise  the  rebels.  He  de- 
clared Jerobeam  an  usurper,  who  was  but  a  servant  of  Solomon, 
and  he  termed  the  friends  of  the  former,  "  Vain  and  low- 
minded  men."  He  strongly  condemned  the  schism  in  the 
national  religion  caused  by  Jerobeam,  and  overloaded  with 
praise  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  its  ministers,  its  rites,  and  the 
musical  performances  connected  with  it.  He  admonished  them, 
in  the  conclusion,  not  to  fight  against  his  army,  which  stood 
under  the  blessing  of  God,  whom  they  had  deserted,  and  who  had 
therefore  forsaken  them. 

This  proclamation,  or  probably,  harangue,  very  naturally 
had  no  effect;  it  being  well  known,  that  the  king  himself  was 
addicted  to  an  idolatry  of  the  vilest  nature.  The  scorn  with 
which  these  words  of  Abiam  were  received  in  Israel,  is  well 
expressed  in  the  satirical  answer  of  the  poet,  as  preserved  in 
the  fiftieth  psalm.  Jerobeam  had  resorted  to  an  old  stratagem 
of  encompassing  the  enemy's  flanks,  and  then  opened  the  attack 
in  front  and  rear  simultaneously.  But  the  position  of  Abiam 
was  of  such  a  nature,  that  he  not  only  defended  himself  effect- 
ually, but  after,  as  it  appears,  Jerobeam  had  wasted  much 
strength  in  the  attack  of  the  heights  occupied  by  the  men  of 
Judah,  Abiam  took  the  offensive  part,  and  gave  Jerobeam  a 
signal  defeat,  who,  appearing  to  have  been  anything  but  a  sol- 
dier, retired,  and  left  in  the  power  of  Abiam,  Bethel,  Jeshanah 
and  Ephron,  with  their  respective  districts.  Ephron,  most 
likely  should  be  read  Ophra,  between  which  and  Bethel  the 
Jeshanah,  mentioned  above,  must  have  been  situated.  This  was 
an  important  loss  to  Jerobeam,  and  the  prediction  of  the  pro- 
phet no  doubt  was  literally  fulfilled  in  regard  to  the  altar  of 
Beth  El,  as  our  text  indeed  mentions  (I  Kings  xiii,  5). 

Jerobeam  had  dearly  paid  for  his  attempt  to  rule  over  all 
Israel.  He  returned  to  Tirzah,  discomfited,  discouraged  and 
with  a  heavy  loss  in  men  and  territory.  He  had  lost  many  of 
his  most  devoted  friends,  which  exposed  him  to  the  opposition 


CHAPTER    X.  427 

party  in  his  own  land.  He  had  undertaken  an  unfortunate  war 
against  the  will  of  the  prophets  and  their  party,  which  must 
only  have  offended,  that  party,  while  the  loss  sustained  by  the 
king  must  have  been  a  welcome  instrument  to  them  to  under- 
mine his  popularity. 

The  son,  and  most  likely  the  intended  successor  of  Jerobeam, 
was  taken  dangerously  sick,  so  that  his  recovery  was  doubtful. 
Jerobeam,  wishing  to  know  the  sentiments  of  his  old  and  now 
blind  friend,  Ahiah  of  Shiloh,  in  regard  to  his  heir,  and  also 
wishing  to  have  those  sentiments  concealed,  if  unfavorable  to  his 
cause,  induced  his  wife — he  appears  to  have  had  but  one  wife — 
to  disguise  and  thus  to  ask  the  old  prophet  in  regard  to  their 
son.  The  queen  did  so;  but,  notwithstanding  her  disguise  and 
the  blindness  of  the  prophet,  he  was  aware  of  her  coming,  and 
when  approaching  him,  he  told  her  that  her  son  would  die;  that 
the  house  of  Jerobeam  was  outlawed  in  the  council  of  God's 
prophets,  that  all  were  doomed  to  destruction,  and  none  of 
that  family,  except  Abiam,  should  be  buried:  "  Who  of  Jero- 
beam will  die  in  the  city,  the  dogs  shall  devour;  and  who  of 
him  will  die  in  the  field  the  birds  of  heaven  shall  consume." 
The  cheerless  mother,  terrified  by  the  dreadful  oracle,  returned  to 
Tirzah,  and  found  her  son  dying,  which  was  the  cause  of  general 
mourning  in  Israel. 

The  fact  that  our  historian  attaches  so  much  importance  to 
the  death  of  that  prince,  who  had  the  same  name  as  the  suc- 
cessor of  Rehabeam,  that  his  death  was  so  generally  lamented 
by  the  nation,  and  that  the  prophet  himself  said  of  the  young 
man  that  he  was  the  only  one  of  the  house  of  Jerobeam  who 
should  have  a  burial,  "  Because  there  is  found  in  him  a  good 
thing  before  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  in  all  the  house  of 
Jerobeam;"  powerfully  suggest,  that  the  deceased  was  the  in- 
tended successor  of  Jerobeam,  a  promising  young  man,  and 
in  possession  of  the  confidence  of  the  people ;  who  was  brought 
out  of  this  world  by  some  foul  contrivance  of  the  enemies  of 
Jerobeam,  in  order  to  exterminate  his  house. 

The  next  son  of  the  king  appears  to  have  been  an  inexpe- 
rienced lad,  who  possessed  neither  the  confidence  nor  the  affec- 


428  PERIOD    IV. 

tions  of  the  nation.  When,  therefore,  Jerobeam,  crushed  under 
the  weight  of  incessant  cares,  vigilance  and  misfortunes,  died 
in  the  twenty-third  year  of  his  reign  (946  e.  c),  and  Nadab, 
his  son,  mounted  the  throne  of  Israel;  the  friends  of  the  royal 
house  were  few  in  number,  and  cool  in  affections.  The  young 
king,  in  the  second  year  of  his  reign,  was  slain  in  the  midst  of 
his  friends,  by  one  of  his  own  superior  officers,  Baashah,  son 
of  Ahiah,  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar,  who  rigidly  executed  the 
decree  of  the  prophets  against  the  house  of  Jerobeam,  of  which 
no  living  being  was  suffered  to  escape.  Baashah,  son  of  Ahiah, 
was,  with  the  consent  of  the  prophets  (II  Kings  xvi),  elevated 
to  the  throne  of  Israel,  not  fully  twenty-five  years  after  the 
division  of  the  kingdom  (944  u.  a). 

In  order  to  preserve  the  connecting  links  of  history,  we  must 
now  return  to  Judah.  When  Abiam  had  closed,  by  an  early 
death,  his  inglorious  reign  of  three  years  of  debauchery  and 
excess,  Asa,  his  son,  mounted  the  throne  of  Jehudah,  two 
years  previous  to  the  demise  of  Jerobeam  (948,  b.  c).  The 
death  of  Abiam  appears  to  have  given  rise  to  the  seventy-third 
psalm,  in  which  the  poet  describes  the  sudden  and  early  death 
of  a  proud,  vile,  and  luxuriant  tyrant,  who  deemed  himself 
elevated  above  the  fate  of  common  people,  but  was  finally 
overreached  by  the  fate  common  to  all  men.  It  is  true,  that 
the  poem  could  have  been  composed  just  as  well  on  the  death 
of  Caligula  or  Nero,  as  of  Abiam;  but  it  was  certainly  com- 
posed on  the  death  of  an  Israelitish  tyrant,  and  at  an  early 
age  of  history;  and  there  we  know  of  none,  who  deserved  such 
a  eulogy  but  Rehab  earn  or  Abiam,  the  latter  of  which  died 
so  young,  that  it  could  be  directed  but  to  him. 

Asa,  thus  informed  of  the  state  of  popular  feelings,  and, 
taking  warning  from  the  short  and  unpopular  reign  of  his 
father,  radically  reformed  the  policy  of  his  predecessors ;  so 
that  it  could  afterwards  be  said  of  him,  he  was  as  pious  as 
his  grandsire  David.  His  first  endeavor  was  to  purify  the 
land  from  the  idols,  altars,  temples,  groves  and  institutes  of 
Astarte,  which  defiled  it  for  a  period  of  about  thirty  years. 
He    afterward   went  so  far   as    to   depose    his   grandmother, 


CHAPTER    X.  429 

Maachah,  from  the  dignity  of  king's  mother  (which,  as  we 
learn  on  this  occasion,  was  a  high  office  at  the  court  of  Juclah 
as  well  as  at  the  Persian  court,  where  even  a  mother  could  be 
adopted  for  political  causes),  because  she  worshiped  an  idol  of 
Astarte — connected  with  the-  wildest  debauchery — which  he 
burned  at  the  Brook  of  Kidron.  This  regeneration  met  with 
the  approbation  of  the  people,  as  we  may  justly  infer  from  the 
prosperous  state  and  general  satisfaction  of  the  people  during 
his  long  reign.  Asa's  activity  was  not  limited  to  the  salutary 
reforms  in  religion,  his  attention  was  also  directed  towards 
other  most  necessary  improvements.  He  fortified  several 
cities,  if  we  correctly  understand  the  expression  of  II  Chroni- 
cles, nSxn  D'Hyn,  it  was  Beth  El,  Ophra  and  Jeshana,  which  he 
fortified,  and  armed  the  people  at  large.  Three  hundred  thou- 
sand men  of  Judah  were  armed  with  targets  and  spears,  and 
two  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  men  of  Benjamin  were  armed 
with  shields  and  bows.  This  general  armament  of  the  people 
is  a  strong  proof  of  the  change  of  policy,  to  which  Asa  may 
have  been  forced  by  the  people,  having  partly  been  armed  for 
defence  of  the  country  in  the  late  invasion  of  Jerobeam.  The 
governmant  of  the  former  kings  of  Judah  was  an  accomplished 
despotism,  which  was  patiently  borne  by  the  people  as  long  as 
the  spirit  of  opposition  animated  the  generality,  and  as  long 
as  danger  wTas  apprehended  from  the  ten  tribes.  But  that  spirit 
had  subsided  with  the  disappearance  of  danger,  crushed  by  the 
hand  of  the  people;  it  is,  therefore,  most  likely  that  Asa  was 
forced  into  those  reform  measures  by  their  will.  We  may  also 
mention  in  support  of  this  view,  the  fact  that  Asa  never  acted 
in  the  beginning  of  his  reign  on  his  own  accord,  but  he  spoke 
to  Judah  before  he  effected  any  of  these  reform  measures.  We 
see  again,  for  the  first  time  since  the  memorable  session  of  the 
national  council  at  Shechem,  a  representation  of  the  people  of 
Judah, 

This  wras  naturally  connected  with  the  reforms  in  religion; 
for  the  abolition  of  foreign  gods  and  their  rites  was  on  its 
positive  side  the  endeavor  to  set  the  Mosaic  law  in  full  force, 
according  to  which  there  must  exist  a  certain  representation  of 


430  PERIOD    IV. 

the  people  to  limit  the  royal  power.  We  are  at  a  loss  to  say, 
how  that  representation  was  organized,  for  onr  sources  are 
entirely  silent  on  the  point,  and  the  Mosaic  mode  of  composing 
the  national  council  was  no  longer  applicable  after  the  union  of 
the  nation  was  dissolved,  and  there  are  no  traces  of  a  federal 
government  any  longer.  Asa  acted  in  the  capacity  of  a  con- 
stitutional monarch;  in  this  capacity,  also,  he  deposited  the 
public  funds  in  the  public  treasury,  which  is  especially  noticed 
in  our  sources. 

The  authors  of  II  Chronicles  and  Josephus,  inform  us  of  an 
invasion  of  Ethiopians  during  the  eleventh  year  of  Asa's  ad- 
ministration, which  the  author  of  I  Kings  has  not  noticed. 
Although  we  can  not  see  any  cause  why  those  two  authorities 
should  have,  or  how  they  could  have  invented  a  fact  of  such 
importance  in  a  time  when  the  traditions  of  the  people  must 
have  exercised  control  in  such  affairs,  and  when  the  book  of 
Kings  was  already  received  in  the  canon  of  the  prophets. 
Still  we  know  of  no  other  method  to  account  for  the  silence  of 
the  author  of  I  Kings,  than  by  referring  to  the  imperfection  of 
that  historical  sketch,  the  principal  end  and  aim  of  which 
appears  to  be,  to  give  a  short  digest  of  the  history  of  Israel, 
Judah  being  mentioned  only  when  necessary,  in  which  more 
than  one  fact  has  passed  unnoticed. 

The  Ethiopians  came  under  the  command  of  their  king 
Zerah,  with  a  vast  number  of  warriors  and  three  hundred 
chariots  of  war.  Dismay  and  consternation  went  before  those 
southern  invaders;  and  Asa  saw  them,  with  terror,  take 
Mareshah,  a  town  in  Judah,  fortified  by  Rehabeam.  But  be- 
tween Mareshah  and  Jerusalem  is  that  mountanous  region, 
where  David  with  his  few  hundred  men  maintained  himself 
against  the  power  of  Saul.  There  Asa  concentrated  his  army, 
from  which  point  he  could  safely  operate  against  the  enemy. 
The  principal  battle  was  fought  in  the  valley  of  Zephatah,  near 
that  town,  where  Asa,  after  having  addressed  a  hearty  prayer 
to  heaven,  attacked  and  routed  the  enemy,  who  in  his  flight 
found  himself  in  want  of  provisions,  so  that  many  of  them 
were   starved  to  death.     Asa  pursued  them  and  drove  them 


CHAPTER    X.  431 

out  of  all  the  towns  in  the  vicinity  of  Gerar  and  out  of  Gerar, 
until  they  finally  left  the  country,  leaving  behind  them  a  rich 
spoil  in  camels,  cattle  and  sheep,  most  likely  the  spoil  they  had 
taken  in  Arabia,  with  which  Asa  triumphantly  returned  to 
Jerusalem. 

For  the  first  time  we  hear  again  the  voice  of  a  prophet  in 
Judah.  The  reforms  and  the  valor  of  Asa,  and  as  we  shall  see 
hereafter  the  policy  of  the  king  of  Israel,  roconciled  that  party 
with  the  king  of  Judah.  It  was  Asariah,  son  of  Oded,  who 
meets  the  returning  king  and  army,  assuring  them  that  God 
would  be  with  them  if  they  would  be  with  him;  and  that  God 
would  forsake  them,  whenever  they  would  forsake  him.  He 
then  continued,  that  there  were  many  days  in  Israel  without  a 
true  God,  an  instructing  priest,  and  a  law;  that  they  returned 
to  God  in  the  days  of  adversity,  and  that  in  those  days  of 
impiety  there  was  no  peace,  but  war  and  insurrections.  He 
concluded  with  the  admonition  to  be  strong  and  confident,  for 
their  labors  would  be  rewarded.  This  speech,  however  short, 
is  of  vital  importance  to  us.  The  prophet  assured  Asa  of  the 
favor  of  his  influential  party,  having  been  formerly  hostile  to 
the  Davidian  dynasty.  But  he  at  the  same  time  told  the  king, 
that  their  favors  depended  not  on  any  dynastical  predominance, 
but  on  the  king's  piety  in  administering  the  laws  of  God.  He 
justified  the  hostility  of  his  party  towards  the  Davidian  dynasty 
by  the  impiety  of  the  former  kings  and  the  consequent  illegality 
and  violence  which  defiled  the  land. 

This  address  produced  the  expected  effect.  Asa  rigorously 
enforced  the  laws  of  Moses  against  all  sorts  of  idolatry  and 
foreign  rites,  not  only  in  Judah,  but  also  in  his  possessions  on 
Mount  Ephraim.  This  policy  won  over  to  him  a  large  and 
influential  party  which  stretched  its  arms  over  the  whole  land. 
Many  of  Israel  came  again  to  Jerusalem,  to  worship  God 
according  to  the  national  rites  and  laws,  which  could  but 
increase  the  influence  of  Asa  in  Israel,  whose  king  must  have 
looked  upon  this  policy  with  just  apprehension;  for  this  was 
the  best  policy  for  reuniting  Israel  under  the  scepter  of 
the  Davidian  ■  dynasty.  The  apprehensions  of  the  king  of 
Israel  must  have  been  remarkably  increased,  when  Asa  in  the 


432  PERIOD  IV. 

fifteenth  year  of  his  reign  called  a  convocation  of  all  Israel  to 
Jerusalem,  to  renew  their  covenant  with  Gocl  on  the  day  when 
the  revelation  on  Mount  Sinai  had  taken  place,  to  which  call 
the  clause  was  added  "  Whoever  shall  not  inquire  for  the  Lord, 
the  God  of  Israel,  shall  be  put  to  death,  from  little  to  great, 
from  man  to  woman,"  which  was  nothing  short  of  a  declara- 
tion of  war  indirectly  sent  to  the  king  of  Israel,  who  accepted 
the  challenge. 

While  the  people  were  yet  assembled  in  Jerusalem  in  conse- 
quence of  that  call,  to  renew  the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  and 
before  Asa  could  prepare  for  the  attack,  Baashah  stood  in  Raman 
at  the  head  of  his  army,  but  forty  furlongs  from  Jerusalem, 
from  which  position  he  could  govern  the  whole  territory  of 
Benjamin,  and  which  place  he  attempted  to  fortify  hastily. 
The  author  of  Chronicles  dates  this  invasion  the  thirty-sixth 
year  of  Asa  (II  Chron.  xii),  while  we  are  informed  (I  Kings, 
xvi,  8),  that  Baashah  died  in  the  twenty-sixth  year  of  Asa; 
which  leads  us  to  believe,  that  the  date  of  Chronicles  is  from 
the  beginning  of  the  separate  monarchy  of  Judah,  which  brings 
the  invasion  to  the  fifteenth  year  of  Asa,  as  we  set  it. 

Before  we  can  proceed,  we  must  review  the  administration  of 
Baashah.  Baashah  mounted  the  throne  of  Israel  over  the  car- 
cases of  the  proscribed  family  of  Jerobeam,  whose  claims  on 
the  throne  were  considered  forfeited  on  account  of  the  schism 
of  Jerobeam.  Consequently  it  must  have  been  expected  of  the 
new  king,  and  it  appears  from  I  Kings  xvi,  that  such  was  the 
express  condition,  that  he  would  renounce  the  schism,  and 
restore  the  national  religion,  which,  as  we  have  seen  before,  he 
could  not  do  without  running  the  risk  of  being  dethroned  in 
favor  of  the  king  of  Judah.  It  would  have  been  imprudent  of 
him  to  run  the  risk  after  Asa  had  become  so  popular  in  Judah; 
wherefore  he  supported  the  schism  for  the  same  causes  that  ori- 
ginally produced  it.  The  prophets  and  their  party  found  them- 
selves disappointed  for  the  second  time,  and  the  dynasty  of 
Jerobeam  had  been  exterminated  without  producing  a  favor- 
able effect.  This  must  have  greatly  afflicted  the  prophets ;  for, 
while  one  of  them  assured  Asa  of  the  favorable  disposition   of 


CHAPTER   X.  433 

his  party  to  the  government  of  Judah,  we  see  now  another, 
Jehu,  son  of  Hanani,  announced  to  Baashah  the  same  terri- 
ble decree  which  Ahiah,  of  Shiloli,  had  pronounced  on  the 
house  of  Jerobcam;  because  that  new  king  had  stepped  into 
the  path  of  the  preceding  one. 

Baashah  had  now  to  contend  with  the  same  opposition  as  his 
predecessors.  His  position  was  most  dangerous,  because  Asa's 
administration  was  better  calculated  to  regain  the  affections  of 
the  people  than  that  of  Rehabeam  and  Abiam;  wherefore  hostili- 
ties between  Baashah  and  Asa  never  ceased,  though  they  n<  ver 
took  a  serious  character.  But  when  Asa  had  succeeded  in 
driving  the  Ethiopians  from  his  territory,  to  secure  to  his  cause 
the  favor  of  the  party  of  the  prophets,  and  then  pursued  boldly 
and  openly  a  course  which  was  calculated  to  undermine  the 
house  of  Baashah,  the  latter  was  naturally  induced  to  think 
of  means  for  his  own  security  and  self-preservation,  to  which 
end  he  entered  into  an  alliance  with  the  king  of  Damascus, 
which  appears  to  have  been  a  secret  in  Judah.  When  Asa  had 
convoked  all  Israel  to  Jerusalem,  Baashah  improved  the  chance 
and  marched  his  army  to  Ramah  without  meeting  with  much 
resistance.  Asa  fully  understood  his  position;  he  had  lost  the 
best  part  of  Benjamin,  was  cut  off  from  the  plain  of  Jericho, 
and  had  the  enemy  close  at  the  capital;  an  enemy  much  too 
strong  for  him,  for  it  was  the  united  armies  of  Baashah  and 
Benhadad,  the  king  of  Damascus.  Asa  must  have  thought 
it  imprudent  to  attack  the  enemy  in  the  hilly  „  regions 
where  he  was  posted,  holding  the  strong  position  of  Geba, 
Michmash  and  Bethel,  and  being  so  much  superior  to  himself 
in  numerical  strength. 

The  prophets  desired  him  to  trust  in  God  and  to  throw  him- 
self into  the  arms  of  the  people,  who  most  likely  would  have 
flocked  in  great  numbers  to  his  standards,  while  a  general  insur- 
rection would  have  takan  place  in  Israel  in  favor  of  Asa. 
They  saw  now  the  best  chance  to  reunite  Israel.  If  the  unit- 
ed armies  of  Baashah  and  Benhadad  had  been  defeated  by 
the  people  headed  by  Asa,  the  reunion  of  Israel  would  have 
been  questionable  no  longer.  But  Asa  was  terrilied  by  the 
28 


434  PERIOD   IV. 

threatening  danger,  his  throne  being  at  stake;  he  had  not  con- 
fidence enough  in  the  prudence  and  influence  of  the  prophets, 
and  so  he  resorted  to  measures  by  no  means  honorable  in  a 
king.  He  sent  to  Benhadad  the  gold  and  silver  of  the  national 
and  private  treasury  of  the  king,  to  move  him  to  determine 
his  alliance  with  Baashah,  and  turn  his  armies  against  the 
latter,  which  Benhadad  treacherously  did.  Surprising  the 
north  of  Israel,  he  took  Eyan,  Dan,  Abel-Beth-Maachah,  the 
district  of  Chinnerath,  and  finally  almost  the  whole  territory 
of  Naphthali.  Baashah,  thus  betrayed  by  his  ally,  hastily 
returned  to  Tirzah  to  protect  his  own  territory. 

Asa  made  the  best  use  of  this  sudden  change  of  affairs ;  ho 
fortified  Geba  and  Mizpah  with  the  very  materials  which 
Baashah  had  brought  to  fortify  Ramah.  He  also  fortified  Jeri- 
cho, to  be  safe  against  a  surprise  from  the  east,  although 
Joshua  had  pronounced  a  curse  upon  him  who  would  do  so. 
But  the  cause  of  that  curse — not  to  impede  the  communica- 
tion between  the  land  east  and  west  of  Jordan — was  regarded 
as  existing  no  longer.  The  prophets  who  never  ceased  to  hope 
for  the  reunion  of  Israel,  took  offence  that  the  curse  of  Joshua 
was  disregarded  (I  Kings,  xvi,  34).  The  conduct  of  Asa  in 
the  late  war  greatly  offended  the  prophets;  Hanani  was  the 
man  who  boldly  admonished  the  king  on  account  of  his  con- 
duct, which  the  prophet  characterized  as  having  been  both 
impious  and  imprudent,  as  it  indeed  was.  It  gave  rise  to  a 
long  series  of  national  misfortunes  to  both  divisions  of  the 
nation.  The  mountain  barriers,  with  which  nature  protected 
the  northern  frontiers  of  Israel  against  the  Syrians,  and  which 
enabled  David  to  overcome  Hadarezer,  were  lost  by  the  abomi- 
nable treachery  of  Benhadad  and  the  cowardice  and  mean 
policy  of  Asa.  The  territory  of  Israel  was  laid  open  to  Syrian 
invasions;  and  the  sequel  will  show,  that  the  prophets  well 
understood  the  whole  extent  of  that  loss,  and  therefore  con- 
demned the  foul  policy  of  Asa. 

Asa  felt  offended  by  the  bold  words  of  the  prophets.  He 
threw  Hanani  into  the  lunatic  asylum ;  and  as  the  event  caused 
much  sensation  among  the  friends  of  the  prophet,   which  most 


CHAPTER    X.  435 

likely  led  to  an  active  demonstration  in  favor  of  the  latter,  Asa 
imprisoned  many  of  the  people  at  that  time  (II  Chronicles,  xvi, 
10).  So  the  friendly  relations  between  the  prophets  and  the 
house  of  David  were  again  at  a  close  after  a  short  duration. 
The  pride  of  Asa  made  him  overbearing  and  unable  to  endure 
the  bold  words  of  truth,  and  so  he  committed  violence  on  the 
person  of  a  prophet,  who  not  only  spoke  in  the  name  of  God 
and  the  law,  which  the  king  was  obliged  to  respect,  but  also 
expressed  the  sentiments  of  a  large,  influential,  and  patriotic 
party  of  the  nation.  This  was  an  act  which  no  king  of  Israel 
dared  to  do;  but  the  kings  of  Judah  boasted  of  their  dynastical 
preference,  and  were  backed  by  a  large  and  powerful  priest- 
hood. The  rest  of  the  administration  of  Asa  was  not  signalized 
by  any  event  of  importance,  which  however  speaks  favorably 
of  his  administration.  In  the  thirty-ninth  year  of  his  reign  he 
was  attacked  with  the  dropsy,  which  finally  put  an  end  to  his 
existence  in  the  forty-first  year  of  his  reign  (907  b.  c.).  The 
pomp  and  display  which  were  made  when  he  was  laid  in  the 
sepulchre  of  his  fathers  in  the  city  of  David,  are  a  testimony 
of  the  satisfaction  which  his  administration  gave  to  the  people. 
Baashah  governed  Israel  about  twenty-three  years,  to  the 
twenty-sixth  year  of  Asa,  consequently  he  reigned  ten  years 
after  the  late  war;  but  nothing  remarkable  occurred  at  that 
time.  It  is  not  said  in  our  sources  how  far  Baashah  recovered 
from  the  late  misfortunes,  whether  or  not  he  recovered  the 
territory  of  Naphthali;  nor  is  any  thing  said  about  the  boun- 
daries between  Judah  and  Israel,  although  it  is  remarked  (II 
Chronicles,  xvii,  2)  that  Asa  took  cities  on  Mount  Ephraim. 
The  fact  appears  to  be,  that  the  king  of  Damascus  claimed 
the  supremacy  over  the  northern  territory,  although  he  sent 
his  army  only  for  the  purpose  of  supporting  Asa ;  and  that  Asa 
probably  took  some  cities  in  the  west  of  Benjamin,  while  he 
lost  some  others  in  the  north,  among  which  most  likely  was 
Beth  El  and  Ophra.  Baashah  died  in  the  twenty-fourth  year 
of  his  reign,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Ailah,  of  whom 
we  know  nothing;  except  that  in  the  second  year  of  his  reign, 
while  sitting  drunk  in  the  house  of  Arza.  his   major  doinus, 


436  PEKIOD    IV. 

Simri  the  commander  of  half  ot  the  chariots  of  war,  who  had 
conspired  against  him,  assassinated  him  and  usurped  the 
throne.  During  his  reign  of  seven  days  he  executed  the  above 
mentioned  decree  on  the  house  of  Baashah  and  on  his  friends, 
which  must  have  been  a  terrible  slaughter.  But  he  was  not 
willing  to  renounce  the  schism,  for  which  the  house  of  Baashah 
and  of  Jerobeam  were  condemned  to  suffer  such  a  miserable 
end.  This  revolt  took  place  while  part  of  the  army  under 
command  of  Omri  besieged  Gibbethon,  a  town  inhabited  by 
Phelistines  and  claimed  by  Dan  {Joshua  xix,  44).  When  tidings 
of  the  regicide  had  reached  the  camp,  Omri  was  proclaimed 
king  of  Israel,  who  marched  with  his  army  to  Tirzah,  which 
lie  took  by  assault.  When  Zimri  saw  that  the  city  was  cap- 
tured, he  went  into  the  royal  palace,  set  it  on  fire,  and  died 
in  the  flames,  leaving  the  royal  power  in  the  hands  of  Omri. 
But  another  party  of  the  people  were  desirous  to  have,  at  the 
head  of  the  nation,  Thibni,  son  of  Ginath.  A  civil  war  began 
which  lasted  four  years. 

We  are  not  informed  respecting  the  nature  of  that  struggle, 
whether  it  was  of  a  mere  parliamentary  nature,  or  whether 
active  hostilities  occurred.  We  do  not  know  the  motives  of 
that  opposition.  We  are  plainly  and  dryly  informed  that  the 
difficulties  were  settled  after  the  death  of  Thibni,  which 
occurred  four  years  after  the  death  of  Ailah,  and  that  Omri 
maintained  himself  on  the  throne.  If  we  may  deduce  from 
inferences,  we  might  say,  that  there  were  no  active  hostilities 
of  a  serious  nature,  for  if  so  the  author  would  have  informed 
us  of  the  facts,  and  Asa  would  have  taken  advantage  of  the 
civil  war,  which  the  author  of  Chronicles  would  not  have  for- 
gotten to  record.  The  severe  criticism  passed  on  Omri,  al- 
though nothing  very  bad  could  be  said  of  him,  except  that  he 
adhered  to  the  schism,  suggests  that  Thibni  was  the  candidate 
of  the  prophets  and  their  party,  who  lost  the  field  this  time; 
wherefore  they  had  no  communication  with  Omri,  and  were 
hated  by  his  son  Ahab. 

Omri  became  sole  king  of  Israel  and  founder  of  the  third 
dynasty  about  915  b.  c.     Two  important  facts  must   here  be 


CHAPTER    X.  437 

noticed,  which  acquaint  us  with  the  endeavors  of  this  king  to 
secure  himself  and  his  posterity  upon  the  throne  of  Israel.  He 
obtained  the  hand  of  Jezebel,  daughter  of  Ethbaal  king  of 
Tyre,  for  his  son  and  intended  successor,  Ahab.  It  appears 
that  this  union  of  Israel  and  Tyre  was  intended  to  counter- 
balance effectually  the  growing  power  of  the  king  of  Damascus, 
who  stood  in  friendly  relations  with  the  king  of  Judah. 

The  second  important  occurrence  was  this :  Omri  bought  a 
hill  of  Shemer  for  two  talents  of  silver,  upon  which  he  com- 
menced the  building  of  a  city,  which  he  called  Shomcron  or 
Samaria.  This  city  was  destined  henceforth  to  be  the  capital 
of  Israel,  and  also  gave  the  name  to  the  middle  division  of 
Palestine.  Shomeron  or  Samaria  was  situated  on  the  line  be- 
tween Ephriam  andMenassah  on  an  elevation,  which  Dr.  Kitto 
calls  "  An  oblong  mountain  of  considerable  elevation  and  very 
regular  in  form,  situated  in  the  midst  of  a  broad, ^deep  valley, 
the  continuation  of  that  of  Shechem,  which  here  expands  into 
live  or  six  miles.  Beyond  this  valley,  which  completely  iso- 
lates the  hill,  the  mountains  rise  again  on  every  side,  forming 
a  complete  wall  around  the  city.  They  are  terraced  to  the 
tops,  sown  in  grain,  and  planted  with  olives  and  figs.  The  hill 
of  Samaria  itself  is  cultivated  from  its  base,  the  terraced  sides 
and  summits  being  covered  with  corn  and  olive  trees.  About 
midway  up  the  ascent,  the  hill  is  surrounded  by  a  narrow  ter- 
race of  level  ground,  like  a  belt,  below  which  the  roots  of  the 
hill  spread  off  more  gradually  into  the  valleys.  Higher  up  are 
the  marks  of  slight  terraces,  once  occupied  perhaps  by  the 
streets  of  the  ancient  city.  The  ascent  of  the  hill  is  very 
steep."  If  this  description  of  Dr.  Kitto  is  considered  enough, 
it  must  be  confessed  that  Omri  judiciously  selected  the  spot 
for  the  new  capital,  which  in  point  of  situation  was  not  sur- 
passed by  Jerusalem.  A  war  between  Benhadad  and  Omri,  in 
which  the  latter  lost  some  cities  and  was  obliged  to  assign  tra- 
ding stations  in  Samaria  to  Benhadad,  is  but  briefly  noticed 
(I  Kings  xx,  34),  and  no  particulars  arc  transmitted  to  us. 
We  are  not  informed  directly  of  the  causes  of  that  war,  nor 
what  cities  were  lost. 


438  PERIOD    IV. 

The  marriage  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel  secured  to  Tyre  advan- 
tages in  trade  over  the  Syrian  merchants,  which  most  likely 
was  the  cause  of  Benhadad's  invasion,  and  which  at  the  same 
time  explains  the  reason  of  the  lanes  of  Samaria  which  were 
ceded  to  Benhadad.  If  this  was  the  cause  we  might  expect 
that  the  cities  lost  by  Omri  were  the  last  of  those  which  com- 
manded the  passes  from  Hollow  Syria  and  the  proper  land  of 
Damascus  into  the  Israelitish  territory.  If  so,  this  was  an 
important  loss;  for  it  opened  a  road  to  a  powerful  neighbor 
into  the  heart  of  the  land ;  still  it  appears  to  have  been  so  from 
the  numerous  invasions,  which  we  shall  have  to  record  in 
the  sequel.  What  part  the  prophets  and  their  party  acted  in 
that  war  is  not  recorded ;  but  if  Thibni  really  was  their  can- 
didate for  the  throne,  which  the  policy  of  the  house  of  Omri 
strongly  confirms,  and  if  we  add  to  this  the  marked  influence 
of  the  prophets  on  the  Syrian  rulers,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter; 
it  would  suggest  the  idea  that  they  favored  the  Syrian  invasion. 
Omri  supporting  the  schism  of  Jerobeam  from  obvious  causes, 
died  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  Asa  after  a  reign  of  seven 
years,  and  he  was  buried  in  his  new  capital. 

Ahab,  his  son,  succeeded  him  (908  b.  c).  This  king,  being 
ruled  by  his  wife  Jezebel,  attempted  a  total  change  of  policy, 
which,  however,  caused  the  loss  of  much  blood,  without  effect- 
ing any  good,  and  without  enabling  him  to  make  the  survivors 
happy.  The  policy  of  Jerobeam  had  been  followed  up  about 
sixty  years,  and  it  had  proved  successful  to  maintain  internal 
peace;  but  it  was  opposed  by  a  strong  party,  which  had  ex- 
terminated two  dynasties ;  and  it  was  too  closely  suited  to  the 
Mosaic  laws,  so  that  the  monarchs  had  no  power  to  quell 
effectually  the  opposition,  or  to  maintain  themselves  on  the 
throne  against  the  will  of  that  party.  They  did  not  dethrone 
the  king,  who  mounted  the  throne  with  their  consent,  although 
he  acted  contrary  to  their  wishes;  but  they  proscribed  his 
family  and  effected  their  ruin.  The  total  silence  of  the  pro- 
phets during  the  reign  of  Omri,  and  the  severe  judgment 
passed  on  him  by  the  author  of  I  Kings,  support  our  con- 
jecture that   Omri  was  opposed  by  the  party  of  the  prophets, 


CHAPTER    X.  439 

hence,  little  doubt  can  be  entertained  that  attempts  were  made 
to  make  the  family  of  Omri  harmless  to  the  land.  But  the 
former  kings  resided  in  the  beautiful  but  weak  Tirzah,  which 
could  be  taken  easil}r,  if  the  people  wished  to  dispose  of  an 
unpopular  ruler;  Ahab  resided  in  the  strong  Samaria,  secured 
against  the  will  of  the  populace.  The  party  of  the  prophets 
were  terrified  and  discomfited  by  the  massacre  of  their  chief 
men,  of  which  but  one  hundred  escaped  by  the  agency  of 
Obadiah,  the  major  domus  of  Ahab.  Tyrian  religion  and 
Tyrian  policy  were  substituted  for  the  liberal  policy  previously 
maintained,  that  policy  was  absolute  and  tyrannical.  The 
temples  of  the  Tyrian,  Baal  and  Astarte  occupied  the  height 
of  Samaria,  which  were  guarded  by  a  host  of  priests,  the  agents 
of  despotism.  Notwithstanding  the  cruel  efforts  of  Ahab  to 
convert  Israel  into  a  pagan  and  despotic  kingdom,  we  find 
among  the  highest  officers  of  his  court,  one  who  was  a  devout 
servant  of  Jehovah.  He  did  not  succeed  in  annihilating  that 
party  who  were  opposed  to  illegality  and  despotism. 

There  was  one  man,  who  effectually  opposed  the  shrewdness 
and  cruelty  of  Ahab,  and  this  was  the  prophet  Elijah,  from 
Thoshab  in  Gilead;  none  knew  from  whence  he  came,  whither 
he  went,  or  how  he  acted.  A  man  grown  up  in  the  rural  dis- 
trict of  Gilead,  who  wore  a  hairy  garment,  and  had  made  the 
solitary  desert  his  home,  was  the  most  powerful  opponent  of 
Ahab.  He  had  the  courage  to  censure  the  conduct  of  the 
king  and  to  threaten  him  with  the  punishmnnt  of  God.  A 
famine,  which  also  transpired  in  Judah,  in  consequence  of  three 
dry  and  sterile  years,  was  a  welcome  chance  to  the  defender  of 
the  Mosaic  law.  It  was  on  account  of  the  wickedness  of  the 
king,  that  God  sent  that  terrible  punishment.  Such,  most 
likely,  was  the  theme  of  the  inspired  patriot,  who  crossed  the 
land  in  all  directions,  to  agitate  the  public  mind.  The  vigi- 
lance of  Ahab  and  his  painful  endeavors  to  get  the  agitator  in 
his  power  remained  fruitless.  When  he  was  told  Elijah  was 
on  the  Brook  of  Cherith,  where  the  Arabs  provided  him  with 
food,  he  was  again  gone  and  lived  in  the  house  of  a  widow  in 
Zarephath,  whom  he  supported  as  lon£  as  ho  was  there,  and 


440  PERIOD    IV. 

whoso  son  be  saved  from  death  before  be  left  her.  And  where- 
ver that  favorite  of  the  pious  and  good  arrived,  be  was  a  wel- 
come stranger;  and  whenever  he  left,  the  people  were  inspired 
by  him,  and  told  marvelous  things  of  him;  which  were  ag- 
grandized with  the  growth  of  admiration  and  veneration  to 
the  man,  and  with  the  lapse  of  time.  So  he  secured  to  himself 
the  popular  feelings,  and  based  upon  that  favor  he  returned 
to  see  Ahab. 

The  famine  had  reached  an  alarming  degree,  and  Ahab  saw 
himself  in  a  critical  position.  Our  account  tells  us  Ahab 
went  into  the  country  in  company  with  his  major  domus,  to 
find  some  grass  in  order  to  preserve  an  animal,  which  at  any 
rate  informs  us,  that  Elijah  met  Ahab  in  the  country,  probably 
not  venturing  to  go  to  Samaria.  Ahab  on  seeing  the  prophet 
asked  him,  "Art  thou  the  agitator  of  Israel;"  on  which 
the  bold  patriot  answered:  "  Not  I  have  agitated  Israel,  but 
thou  and  the  house  of  thy  father,  by  forsaking  the  commands 
of  Jehovah  and  walking  after  Baal."  This  brief  conversation 
fully  informs  us  of  the  state  of  affairs,  as  they  were  at  that  time. 
Elijah  had  thus  mastered  the  king,  that  he  not  only  gave  his 
consent  to,  but  also  officially  called  a  public  convention  10 
Mount  Carmel,  that  the  people  might  decide  whether  they 
should  serve  Jehovah  or  Baal,  which  is  to  say,  whether  the 
king's  tyrannical  policy  should  continue  to  displace  the  ancient 
laws  of  the  nation,  which  were  the  barriers  of  the  popular 
liberties,  enjoyed  for  nearly  six  centuries. 

A  modern  traveler  thus  describes  Mount  Carmel:  "The 
sea  washes  the  foot  of  the  hills  on  each  side,  and  stretches  out 
full  in  front  till  lost  in  the  distance.  To  the  east  and  north- 
east lies  that  extension  of  the  splendid  plain  of  Esdraelan, 
which  reaches  to  the  white  walls  of  Acre,  and  through  which, 
that  ancient  river,  the  river  Kishon,  was  winding  its  way  to  the 
sea,  not.  far  from  the  foot  of  Carmel.  To  the  south  is  seen  the 
narrow  plain  between  the  mountains  and  the  sea,  which  after- 
wards expands  into  the  plain  of  Sharon.  And  along  the  ridge 
of  Mount  Carmel  itself  is  a  range  of  eminences,  extending 
many  miles  to  the  south-east,  all  of  them  presenting  a  surface 


CHAPTER    X.  441 

of  table  land  on  the  top,  sometimes  bare  and  rocky,  and  some- 
times covered  with  mountain  shrubs.  Carmel  is  not  remark- 
able for  height;  and  is  nowhere  in  scripture  celebrated  for  its 
loftiness.  At  the  point  overhanging  the  sea  it  is  less  than  nine 
hundred  feet  high.  To  the  south-east  it  rises  to  the  height  of 
twelve  hundred  feet,  which  is  its  greatest  altitude.  But  then 
the  range  of  hills  runs  nearly  eight  miles  into  the  country,  and 
was  in  former  days  fruitful  to  a  proberb.  Indeed,  the  name 
Carmel,  signifying  a  fruitful  field,  was  given  to  it  evidently 
for  this  reason.  And  when  this  vast  extent  of  fruitful  hills 
was  covered  over  with  vineyards,  olive  groves,  and  orchards 
of  iigs  and  almond  trees,  not  on  the  side  alone,  but  also  along 
the  table  land  of  its  summit;  Carmel,  worthy  of  its  name, 
must  have  appeared  an  immense  hanging  garden  in  the  midst 
of  the  land.*  The  praise  which  Solomon  and  Isaiah  bestow 
on  Carmel  gives  us  an  exalted  view  of  its  beauty  and  pristine 
luxuriance. 

This  spot  was  judiciously  selected  by  the  inspired  patriot  for 
the  great  convention.  The  heart  of  man  beats  high  and  free, 
his  sentimens  are  expanded  and  purified,  and  a  sacred  awe  and 
a  reverence  for  truth  overwhelms  the  heart,  when  standing 
on  such  a  height  as  Carmel  was,  beholding  around  and  at  his 
feet  the  brilliant  scenes  and  luxuriant  vegetation,  testifying  to 
God's  benignity  and  majesty.  There  assembled  the  thousands 
of  Israel,  and  Ahab,  too,  appeared  in  company  of  four  hundred 
and  fifty  of  the  prophets  of  Baal,  and  four  hundred  prophets 
of  Astarte.  Eight  hundred  and  fifty  advocates  of  fiction  and 
despotism  had  to  combat  with  but  one  simple  champion  of 
truth  and  popular  liberty,  and  the  people  should  judge'  on 
whose  side  was  true  salvation.  Elijah  gave  the  preference 
to  the  majority  of  his  opponents;  they  should  first  try  to  win 
the  people  to  their  doctrines.  They  exhausted  all  the  arts 
that  imposing  ceremonies,  eloquent  speeches,  and  popular 
superstitions  afforded;  but  no  fire  came  from  heaven,  cold  and 
frigid  their  hearts  remained,  and  their  arts  met  with  the  acute 
irony  of  the  unmoved  spectators.     But  when  the  day  declined, 

*The  Hebrew  Observer,  1,  24. 


442  PERIOD    IV. 

the  man  with  the  hairy  garment,  the  simple  and  unpretending 
man  of  the  people,  erected  an  altar  of  twelve  stones,  which 
was  calculated  to  remind  his  audience,  that  "before  God  the 
twelve  tribes  of  Israel  were  an  indivisible  unity.  On  this 
altar  the  prophet  sacrificed  an  ox.  according  to  the  simple 
ceremonies  of  the  patriarchs,  and  then  he  prayed  to  God,  to 
the  One  and  Immutable,  and  the  words  which  he  then  spoke 
to  the  assembled  multitude  must  have  been  simple,  sublime 
and  powerful.  What  eight  hundred  and  fifty  agents  of  despot- 
ism and  fiction  could  not  produce,  the  simple  Elijah  could;  he 
summoned  down  the  fire  from  heaven;  he  inspired  the  hearts 
of  the  thousands  of  Israel,  who  unanimously  exclaimed  "Je- 
hovah is  the  true  God."  This  was  a  loud  and  unreserved 
condemnation  of  the  policy  of  Ahab,  who  must  have  stood 
terrified  and  amazed,  and  most  likely  ashamed  of  his  infirmi- 
ties, when  at  the  command  of  Elijah  all  the  advocates  of 
Ahab's  policy  were  seized,  dragged  to  the  nearest  river 
(Kishon?),  and  killed  there  as  a  sacrifice  for  the  prophets 
who  were  massacred  by  the  command  of  Jezebel.  But  none 
touched  or  insulted  Ahab,  which  again  demonstrated  an  honor- 
able moderation  amidst  the  most  intense  excitement.  Still 
Elijah,  who  most  likely  protected  the  person  of  the  king,  must 
have  feared  the  populace  would  assault  the  king,  wherefore  he 
went  with  him  as  far  down  as  Jezreel.  Ahab  reached  his 
palace  mortified  and,  as  it  appears  in  the  sequel,  determined  to 
change  his  policy;  but  the  queen,  Jezebel,  was  enraged  at  hear- 
ing of  the  miserable  end  of  her  favorites,  who  had  eaten  at  her 
table,  and  in  her  rage  she  threatened  to  take  vengeance  on 
Elijah,  but  he  being  informed  in  due  season,  made  his  escape 
to  Bear  Sheba  in  Jchudah,  where  he  left  his  servant  and  retired 
into  the  desert,  from  which  he,  after  some  time,  returned  with 
the  mission  to  anoint  Jehu,  son  of  Nimshi,  to  be  king  of  Israel, 
Hazael,  king  of  Syria,  and  Elishah,  son  of  Shaphat,  from 
Abel  Meholah,  to  be  his  own  successor. 

This  informs  us  of  two  important  facts.  First  we  learn  the 
spot  where  the  prophets  held  their  councils,  in  the  desert,  one 
day's  journey  from  Bear  Sfreba.     They  were  the  national  coun- 


CHAPTER    X.  443 

cil  of  their  party,  and  their  decrees  were  considered  as  sacred 
as  formerly  those  of  the  national  council,  constituted  under  the 
laws  of  Moses,  which  it  was  their  sole  end  and  aim  to  main- 
tain. That  those  decrees  were  considered  to  emanate  directly 
from  God,  can  not  surprise  the  reader  if  he  will  recall  what  we 
have  said  on  the  subject  in  our  introduction  to  this  volume. 
In  the  second  place  we  learn  from  this  statement  that  the  party 
of  the  prophets  was  not  limited. to  Palestine,  they  had  their 
friends  and  followers  in  all  the  provinces  of  Syria,  as  we  shall 
see  still  more  plainly  hereafter,  which  entitles  us  to  the  belief, 
that  the  principles  of  the  Mosaic  law  traversed  the  plains  of 
Syria  in  the  days  of  David  and  Solomon,  after  which  time  the 
friends  of  that  law,  both  in  Palestine  and  Syria,  acted  in  per- 
fect unison,  under  the  guide  of  the  prophets,  who  maintained 
the  national  council,  over  which  now  Elijah  presided,  and  after 
him  his  successor,  Elisha.  They  maintained  their  preponderance 
and  influence  without  any  other  power  than  the  force  of  truth 
and  a  superior  intellect.  Their  decrees  were  enforced,  although 
opposed  by  those  who  were  in  power,  which  fact  gives  us  an 
exalted  idea  of  both  their  numerical  and  intellectual  forces. 
This  decree  of  Elijah  should  most  likely  come  after  Ahab  had 
again  yielded  to  the  wickedness  of  his  wife,  when  we  shall 
find  Elijah  again  conversing  with  Ahab.  We  noticed  it  here, 
because  the  author  of  I  Kings  sets  it  in  this  place,  in  order 
not  to  interrupt  the  following  eventful  affairs. 

Benhadad,  king  of  Syria,  making  the  best  use  of  the 
famine,  and  the  political  differences  of  the  land  of  Israel, 
invaded  the  country  at  the  head  of  the  united  army  of  thirty- 
two  petty  kings,  in  which  the  chariots  of  war  and  the  cavalry 
played  a  prominent  part.  That  hilly  region  of  the  country, 
where  David  once  routed  the  army  of  Iladarezer,  was  now  in 
the  hands  of  Benhadad.  The  land  was  open  for  the  advance- 
ment of  the  cavalry  and  the  chariots,  and  so  Benhadad  meeting 
with  no  effectual  resistance  in  the  northern  plains,  succeeded 
in  occupying  the  valley  between  Samaria  and  the  northern 
range  of  mountains,  in  the  center  of  which  Pentcromias  most 
likely  marks  the  spot  of  Benhadad's  headquarters.     Being  thus 


444  ,  PERIOD    IV. 

situated,  lie  must  have  thought  it  very  easy  to  take  Samaria; 
he,  therefore,  sent  ambassadors  to  Ahab,  demanding  of  him  to 
acknowledge  the  superiority  of  Benhadad,  and,  consequently, 
his  right  of  possession  to  all  the  property  as  well  as  to  the 
wives  and  children  of  Ahab,  who  submitted  to  his  demand. 
Benhadad,  on  having  convinced  himself  of  the  weakness  of 
Ahab,  again  sent  his  ambassadors  into  the  city,  demanding 
actual  possession  of  all  the  treasures  and  the  seraglio  of  Ahab, 
and  of  all  his  ministers;  announcing  at  the  same  time,  that,  if 
this  demand  be  refused,  he  would  send  to-morrow  his  armies 
to  spoliate  Samaria.  Ahab  was  willing  to  sacrifice  his  own 
property,  but  he  had  no  right  to  dispose  of  the  property  of  his 
subjects;  he,  therefore  submitted  the  cause  to  the  national 
council,  who  unanimously  refused  to  comply  with  the  igno- 
minious demands  of  Benhadad.  On  being  informed  of  that 
refusal,  Benhadad  threatened  to  reduce  Samaria;  on  which 
Ahab's  laconic  answer  was,  "  Let  not  him  that  girdeth,  boast 
as  him  that  putteth  off"  (the  sword).  Benhadad  gave  orders 
to  assail  the  city,  which  was  done  by  a  division  of  the  army, 
while  he  and  his  associate  kings  remained  in  their  head- 
quarters, where  we  are  told  he  was  drunk;  which  most  likely 
accounts  for  his  defeat.  For  no  sooner  had  it  been  observed 
by  one  of  the  prophets,  who  had  their  men  in  Samaria  and  in 
the  camp  of  Benhadad,  that  the  movement  of  the  Syrian  army 
was  an  imprudent  one,  than  a  prophet  stood  before  Ahab 
advising  him  to  attack  the  enemy  in  the  field.  Ahab  went  out 
of  the  city  at  the  head  of  seven  thousand  troops,  who  were 
officered  by  two  hundred  and  thirty  of  the  young  aristocracy, 
and  attacked  that  division  of  the  Syrian  army  which  advanced 
to  assail  the  city.  Benhadad,  instead  of  setting  the  cavalry  in 
motion,  gave  orders,  as  an  intoxicated  man  would  do,  to  catch 
them  alive.  '  The  Syrians  in  the  valley  were  routed,  the  Israel- 
ites succeeded  in  reaching  the  mountains,  on  which  the  prin- 
cipal army  was  stationed;  and  there  the  Syrians  were  lost;  for 
the  Israelitish  warriors  were  far  superior  to  the  heavy  chariots 
and  cavalry  of  the  Syrians.  Benhadad  sustained  a  heavy 
defeat,  and  himself  escaped  only  by  the  swiftness  of  his  horse. 


CHAPTER    X.  445 

The  victory  was  thought  to  be  a  decisive  one;  but  the  pro- 
phets, better  informed  on  the  subject  than  Ahab,  advised  the 
latter  to  prepare  for  another  campaign,  as  the  invasion  would 
be  repeated  the  ensuing  year,  of  which  advice  Ahab  made  the 
best  use.  He  extended  his  line  of  defence  as  far  north  as  pos- 
sible ;  but  the  northern  cities  remained  in  the  hands  of  the 
Syrians,  and,  consequently,  the  strong  Aphek  put  a  stop  to 
the  progress  of  Ahab.  Benhadad,  on  the  advice  of  his  servants, 
fitted  out  another  expedition  against  Ahab;  but  he  was  cau- 
tioned not  to  fight  the  Israelites  on  the  mountains,  as  their  God 
was  reported  to  be  the  Lord  of  mountains,  and  not  to  take 
with  him  a  company  so  seductive  as  thirty-one  kings ;  he  pre- 
ferred to  have  them  replaced  by  so  many  pashas.  The  next 
spring  Benhadad  proceeded  with  his  army  as  far  as  Aphek, 
where  he  found  his  progress  checked  by  the  Israelitish  army, 
which  was  far  inferior  in  number  to  his  own. 

Again,  one  of  the  prophets  was  present  in  the  camp  of  Ahab, 
who  knew  what  had  been  spoken  in  the  council  of  the  king  of 
Damascus;  consequently,  he  was  also  aware  of  the  strength 
and  position  of  the  enemy.  Ahab,  thus  informed  of  the 
enemy's  intentions  and  positions,  certainly  took  appropriate 
measures.  He  lingered  on  the  hills  for  six  days,  most  likely 
until  the  Syrians  in  the  plain  were  outgeneraled.  The  seventh 
day  Ahab  attacked  them  in  the  plain,  and  forced  them  to  retire 
to  Aphek,  where  part  of  the  walls  gave  way,  and  fell  upon 
twenty-seven  thousand  of  the  enemy,  which  made  the  defeat  of 
Benhadad  complete,  so  that  he  himself  could  not  make  his  escape, 
and  was  obliged  to  hide  himself  in  a  house  in  the  city,  which 
was  surrounded  and  garrisoned  by  the  Israelites.  Most  likely 
we  are  to  understand  the  number  twenty-seven  thousand  as  the 
whole  number  of  those  killed  in  consequence  of  the  breach  in 
the  wall,  which  probably  was  made  by  the  battering  rams  of  the 
Israelites.  Benhadad  was  in  a  critical  situation,  and  he  had 
no  other  way  of  escaping  than  to  sue  for  mercy.  His  servants 
informed  him,  "  that  the  kings  of  Israel  were  merciful  kings/' 
Benhadad  sent  his  humble  petition  to  Ahab,  praying  him  to 
spare  his  life;  he  was  not  mistaken  in  Ahab,  who,  on  hearing 


446  PERIOD    IV. 

that  his  antagonist  yet  lived,  not  only  granted  his  petition,  but 
also  honored  him  with  a  seat  in  the  royal  carriage.  Peace 
was  concluded,  the  terms  of  which  were,  that  Benhadad  should 
evacuate  all  the  cities  belonging  to  the  territory  of  Israel, 
which  were  taken  in  former  years  by  the  father  of  Benhadad, 
and  that  trading  stations  should  be  given  to  Ahab,  in  Damascus, 
as  the  father  of  Benhadad  had  received  in  Samaria,  which  was 
to  establish  a  free  trade  between  the  two  countries.  Benhadad 
gave  his  word  of  honor  to  this  treaty,  and  was  dismissed  as  an 
ally  of  Israel.  When  Ahab  returned  to  Samaria,  he  was  met 
on  the  way  by  one  of  the  prophets,  who  admonished  him 
about  the  imprudence  thus  committed,  in  dismissing  Benhadad 
without  having  any  other  guaranty  for  the  fulfillment  of  the 
treaty  than  his  word  of  honor;  which  the  prophet,  knowing 
Benhadad  better  than  Ahab  did,  knew  to  be  insufficient,  as  it 
indeed  proved.  He  told  Ahab  that  his  magnanimity  would 
be  returned  with  vengeance  and  bloodshed.  This  message 
made  an  evil  impression  on  the  mind  of-  the  king,  who  had 
otherwise  much  cause  to  rejoice  in  his  brilliant  victory.  Still, 
the  army  of  Benhadad  must  have  been  considerably  weakened; 
for  there  was  peace  for  the  next  three  years,  and  then  Ahab 
wras  the  aggressor. 

The  whole  deportment  of  Ahab,  since  the  convention  on 
Mount  Carmel,  was  strictly  within  the  limits  of  the  law, 
although  it  appears  that  he  did  not  prohibit  his  wife  and  sub- 
jects from  the  worship  of  Baal  and  Astarte,  but  it  remained  a 
private,  and,  most  likely,  a  secret  affair.  We,  therefore,  found 
him  on  the  best  terms  with  the  prophets,  who  advised  and 
cooperated  with  him  for  the  welfare  of  Israel,  and  to  whom  he 
paid  a  marked  respect.  His  conduct  toward  Benhadad  was 
marked  by  bravery,  success  and  humanity,  and  there  was  no 
cause  for  complaint  against  him.  But,  alas!  the  unfortunate 
Ahab  could  not  possibly  continue  this  course  of  action,  for  he 
was  the  weak  husband  of  a  treacherous,  reckless  and  vain 
princess ;  and  the  devices  of  his  wife  prevented  him  from  being 
the  beloved  and  honored  ruler  of  a  happy  people. 

Adjoining  the  estate  of  Ahab  at  Jezreel,  Naboth  possessed  a 


CHAPTEK    X.  447 

vineyard,  which  Ahab  wished  to  add  to  his  estate,  offering  to 
Naboth  a  fair  compensation,  which  he  refused,  as  a  wickedness 
to  dispose  of  the  inheritance  of  his  father.  Ahab  was  grieved 
by  that  refusal,  and  on  request  he  communicated  to  his  wife, 
Jezebel,  the  cause  of  his  grief.  The  Tyrian  princess  could 
not  comprehend  how  an  humble  subject  dared  to  refuse  to 
the  king  such  a  plausible  prayer;  but  the  laws  of  Moses 
granted  that  right  to  the  humblest  inhabitant  of  Palestine. 
Still  Jezebel  had  not  the  courage  to  invade  the  laws  openly, 
and  she  resorted  to  a  foul  contrivance.  Secret  instructions 
in  the  name  and  under  the  seal  of  the  king  were  sent  by 
Jezebel  to  the  officers  of  that  place,  to  hold  a  public  meeting, 
to  set  Naboth  at  the  head  of  the  people,  to  have  seated  next 
to  him  two  unprincipled  men,  to  accuse  him  of  having  blas- 
phemed God  and  the  king,  to  try  him  on  that  offence,  and 
condemn  him  to  death.  The  officers  of  the  town  of  Jezreel 
obeyed,  and  Naboth  was  condemned  to  death,  after  which 
Ahab  took  possession  of  the  estate  of  the  executed  Naboth, 
whose  mournful  end  could  not  have  remained  a  secret  to  the 
king.  While  both  the  secret  instructions  of  Jezebel  to  the  offi- 
cers of  Jezreel,  and  the  procedure  in  the  cause  against  Naboth 
are  admitted  to  be  an  unquestionable  testimony  of  the  exist- 
ence of  the  Mosaic  code  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  it  was 
maintained,  that  the  confiscation  of  the  property  of  a  delin- 
quent, who  was  executed  for  high  treason,  was  not  founded 
on  the  Mosaic  law.  The  expounders  of  the  law  maintained, 
that  the  established  law  mentioned  in  this  cause  was  founded 
on  the  Mosaic  custom,*  which  was  adopted  by  Maimonides 
(Kings  iv,  9).  There  is  no  law  in  the  Mosaic  code  to  this  effect; 
still  the  words  of  the  daughters  of  Zelaphad,  when  they  claimed 
the  lot  of  their  father,  is  an  unquestionable  proof,  that  such  a 
law  was  established  in  regard  to  the  estate  of  a  convict  for 
high  treason.  They  said,  "  Our  father  died  in  the  wilderness, 
and  he  was  not  in  the  company  of  them  that  gathered  them- 
selves against  the  Lord  in  the  company  of  Corah ;  but  died  in 


448  PERIOD    IV. 

his  own  sin,  and  had  no  sons  (Numbers  xxvii,  3).  These  words 
imply  clearly,  if  their  father  had  been  in  the  company  of  the 
rebels  headed  by  Corah,  their  claim  to  the  estate  of  their 
father  would  have  been  forfeited.  The  objections  of  Rabbi  Je- 
hudah  against  this  law,  which  Maimonides  disregarded,  were 
raised  against  the  confiscation  of  personal  property  only. 

This  foul  act  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel  roused  again  the  indig- 
nation of  the  party  of  the  prophets,  who  thought  to  be  con- 
vinced, that  the  submission  of  Ahab  to  the  law  was  but  a 
submission  to  necessity,  while  his  heart  was  as  wicked  as  ever. 
A  man  who  thus  invaded  the  laws  was  unfit  to  administer 
them,  and  justice  demanded  that  Ahab  be  deposed  from  office. 
This  is  the  proper  place  for  the  decree  of  Elijah  mentioned 
above,  when  not  only  Ahab  had  given  ample  cause  for  such  a 
decree,  but  also  Benhadad  by  his  breach  of  the  stipulations  of 
a  treaty,  which  was  sealed  by  his  word  of  honor  and  which 
saved  his  life,  for  he  evacuated  not  the^1  cities  of  Israel.  Eli- 
jah left  his  solitary  resort  and  proceeded  to  Jezreel.  On  the 
road  Elijah  passed  Abel  Meholah,  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Gilboa, 
where  he  met  Elisha  ploughing  the  field,  whom  he  apprized  of 
the  fact  that  he  would  be  his  successor;  then  he  wrent  in  com- 
pany of  Elisha  to  Jezreel,  where  he  found  Ahab  in  the  vine- 
yard of  Naboth.  Ahab  knew  what  brought  the  prophet  to  that 
place,  and  therefore  asked  him,  "Did  my  enemy  find  me?" 
The  prophet  did  not  confess  to  be  his  enemy,  but  he  announced 
to  him  not  only  the  same  horrible  decree  which  had  made  a 
lamentable  end  to  two  dynasties  preceding  his  own;  but  he  also 
predicted  terrible  evils  to  befall  the  king,  and  especially  his  in- 
famous consort,  Jezebel.  Ahab  confessed  his  wickedness,  and 
felt  extremely  mortified  about  his  crime;  he  also  expressed  his 
repentance,  and  the  prophet  assured  him,  in  consoling  terms, 
that  the  evil  would  not    come  in  his  days. 

In  order  to  follow  up  a  straight  course  of  history  we  must 
now  direct  our  attention  to  Judah,  and  we  will  find  that  the 
affairs  transpiring  in  Israel  had  a  considerable  effect  on  Judah. 
Jehoshaphat  succeeded  his  father  Asa  to  the  throne  in  the 
fourth  year  of  Ahab.     This  king  changed  in  no  wise  the  policy 


CHAPTER    X.  449 

of  his  father  J  he  was  opposed  to  idolatry,  was  favorably 
inclined  to  the  Mosaic  law,  and  consequently  also  willing  to 
protect  the  liberties  of  the  people,  and  to  administrate  justice 
and  equity.  The  political  commotions  in  Israel  and  the  hos- 
tile attitude  of  Syria  towards  that  land  made  Jehoshaphat 
cautious;  he  garrisoned  the  principal  places,  especially  on 
Mount  Ephraim,  and  completed  the  armament  of  the  people,  to 
which  he  gave  a  military  organization  to  have  effect  in  case  of 
war.  The  warriors  of  Judah  were  divided  into  three  divisions, 
under  the  command  of  one  superior  and  two  inferior  officers; 
and  the  warriors  of  Benjamin  were  divided  into  two  divisions 
under  the  command  of  one  superior  and  one  inferior  officer.  In 
regard  to  internal  improvements  two  facts  are  mentioned, 
which  laud  the  wise  and  truly  judicious  administration  of  this 
prince.  He  traveled  through  the  whole  of  his  land  to  gather 
correct  information  regarding  the  state  of  the  people  and  the 
exigencies  of  the  age.  Finding  the  dispensation  of  justice  de- 
ficient on  account  of  the  want  of  a  sufficient  number  of  high 
courts — for  according  to  the  Mosaic  law  there  was  but  one  high 
court  in  every  tribe,  and  the  jurisdiction  of  the  local  courts 
was  remarkably  limited,  so  that  every  capital  cause  had  to  be 
brought  before  one  of  the  tribunals  at  Jerusalem — Jehoshaphat 
divided  the  land  into  as  many  judicial  districts  as  there  were 
fortified  cities,  for  each  of  which  he  appointed  a  tribunal  of 
justice  with  the  power  to  decide  on  all  capital  cases,  as  well 
as  on  minor  cases,  both  criminal  and  civil,  giving  them  the 
proper  number  of  shoterim,  or  civil  officers  of  the  tribe  of 
Levi,  to  execute  the  will  of  the  court.  The  reform  consisted 
merely  in  the  division  into  districts,  and  giving  to  each  district 
a  tribunal  invested  with  th^  powers  which  formerly  were 
possessed  only  by  the  courts  of  the  tribes.  The  executive 
officers  stood  as  before,  under  the  principal  command  of  the 
nassi  in  civil  affairs,  and  under  the  high  priest  in  sacerdotal 
affairs.  In  Jerusalem  also  this  prince  instituted  a  new  court 
of  justice  to  have  jurisdiction  in  civil  and  criminal  affairs, 
composed,  according  to  the  Mosaic  law,  of  the  heads  of  fami- 
lies and  priests,  with  Levites  as  executive  officers.  This  new 
29 


450  PERIOD     IV. 

court  appears  to  have  been  situated  in  Jerusalem  for  the  same 
purpose  as  those  of  other  cities,  while  the  two  courts  of  the 
two  tribes  were  given  an  appelate  jurisdiction  only,  as  they 
had  ever  afterwards,  till  the  destruction  of  the  second  temple. 

His  second  measure,  which  the  author  of  Chronicles  mentions 
first,  was  to  send  sixteen  officers  into  the  country,  which  was, 
most  likely,  divided  into  sixteen  districts,  to  expound  to  the  peo- 
ple the  law  of  the  Lord  in  all  of  the  towns  of  Judea.  This  proba- 
bly was  the  beginning  of  synagogues,  which  gradually  displaced 
the  altars  on  the  heights  of  the  land,  which  offered  so  many 
opportunities  to  practice  idolatry.  This  measure  is  dated  the 
third  year  of  Jehoshaphat,  consequently  it  was  in  the  sixth  or 
seventh  year  of  Ahab,  which  was  either  the  same  year  or  the 
year  after  the  convention  of  the  people  on  Mount  Carmel.  It 
undoubtedly  exercised  no  slight  influence  on  the  conduct  and 
measures  of  Jehoshaphat,  who  saw  Ahab  subjugated  to  the 
laws  of  Moses  by  the  popular  will.  The  author  of  II  Chroni- 
cles informs  us,  that  these  measures  of  internal  improvement 
commanded  the  respect  of  the  neighboring  nations,  and  gave 
full  satisfaction  not  only  in  Judah,  but  also  in  the  depending 
provinces  of  Phelistia  and  Arabia;  under  the  latter  he  most 
likely  understood  Arabia  Petreas  only.  The  country  flourished, 
and  the  public  wealth  increased  so  remarkably,  that  the 
king  could  build  new  castles  and  store  houses  in  fortified  cities, 
which  were  well  filled.  The  private  wealth  also  of  the  king 
greatly  increased. 

The  next  event  of  importance  in  the  administration  of 
Jehoshaphat  is  the  marriage  of  Jehoram,  his  son  and  intended 
successor,  with  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel. 
This  marriage  is  therefore  of  importance  to  us,  because  it  is  a 
demonstration  of  the  peaceable  policy  of  the  two  monarchs  of 
Israel  towards  each  other,  acknowledging  each  other's  legiti- 
macy after  a  fruitless  contest  of  nearly  seventy  years.  On 
the  other  side  it  confirms  our  view  of  the  policy  of  Ahab,  after 
the  convention  on  Mount  Carmel;  for  if  Ahab  had  not  been 
considered  an  adherent  to  the  laws  of  Moses,  Jehoshaphat 
could  not  have  purposed  that  intermarriage,  the  people  would 


CHAPTEli     X.  451 

• 

not    have    consented  to  it,    and   the    dissenting   voice    of  the 
prophets   would   have   made   itself  heard.     It   is  necessary  to 
ascertain  the  precise  date  of  that  marriage,  because  it  throws 
light  on  subsequent  facts.     Ahaziah,  the  son  of  Jehoram,  was 
twenty-two    years    old    when   his    father    died,     consequently 
Jehoram,  who   lived   but  forty  years,  was  eighteen  years   old, 
when  this  son  was  born.     His   other  sons  appear  to  have  been 
from  another  wife,  for  it  is  said  that  on  the  death  of  Ahaziah, 
she  saw  that  her  son  died  ;  consequently  Ahaziah  was  the  only  son 
of  the  daughter  of  Ahab.     If  Ahaziah  was  born  one  year  after 
his  parents'  marriage,  Jehoram  was  seventeen  years  old,  when  ho 
married  the  daughter  of  Ahab ;  being  thirty-two  years  old  when 
his  father  died,  who   reigned   twenty-five  years,  this  marriage 
must  have  taken  place  in  the   eleventh  year  of  Jehoshaphat, 
and  the  fifteenth  year  of  Ahab,   the  year  previous  to  the  inva- 
sion  of    Benhadad.      This    chronological    investigation     will 
explain  the  causes  of  the  following  attack  made  upon  Judah. 
When  Benhadad  had  advanced  as   far  as  Samaria,  and  in  the 
east-Jordan  land  at  least  as  far  south  as  Raman  in  Gilead,  if 
not  beyond  this,  it   was   very  natural  for  him  to   apprehend 
a  coalition  of  the  two  kings  of  Israel,  who  were  now  relatives. 
Besides  this,  it  was  an  act  of  prudence  on  the  side  of  Benhadad 
to  revolutionize  the  dependencies  of  Israel,  viz.,  Amnion  and 
Moab.     He  therefore,   at  the  same  time  when  he  marched  on 
Samaria,  sent  an  army  to  Ammon  and  Moab,  who   as   subse- 
quent  facts  show,    were   dissatisfied  with   the    government  of 
Samaria,  and  therefore  that  army  easily  succeeded  not  only  in 
revolutionizing  Ammon  and  Moab,  but  in  obtaining  reinforce- 
ments from  the  dissatisfied  portion  of  Idumea.     When  this  was 
effected,   the   united  army  of  Syrians,  Ammonites,    Moabites, 
and  Idumeans,  marched  against  the  territory  of  Judah.     This 
was  a  threatening  event  on  account  of  Idumea,  to  lose  which 
would  have  been  fatal  to  the  commerce  of  Judah,  on  which  the 
nation  greatly   depended.     The  position   taken  by  Benhadad's 
army  appeared  especially  calculated  to  liberate  Idumea;  for  he 
was   encamped  at  Engedi,   at  the   south-westurn   extremity  of 
the  Dead  Sea,  fronting   the   territory   of  Judah,   and  covering 


452  PERIOD    IV. 

Idumea.  This  position  was  taken  in  order  to  give  them  time 
to  organize  an  insurrection,  and  to  join  the  Syrian  standards. 
Jehoshaphat  acted  promptly.  He  called  out  a  sufficient  num- 
ber of  troops,  held  a  solemn  service  at  Jerusalem,  eloquent 
speakers  encouraged  the  warriors,  and  then  he  marched  to 
meet  the  enemy.  The  army  proceeded  as  far  south  as  the 
valley  under  Mount  C arm  el  in  Judah,  where  the  battle  was 
fought.  It  continued  for  three  days  and  ended  in  the  total 
defeat  of  the  enemy,  who  left  the  field  of  battle  covered 
with  their  dead  and  a  rich  spoil  for  the  victors.  The  place 
was  called  the  Valley  of  Praise,  and  afterwards  was  called  the 
Valley  of  Jehoshaphat.  The  king  and  the  army  returned  in 
triumph  to  Jerusalem,  where  God  was  praised  in  another  im- 
posing service.  The  provinces  depending  on  Judah  were  thus 
preserved  by  the  prompt  action  of  Jehoshaphat.  The  defeat 
of  Benhadad  in  Aphek  and  in  Engedi  were  most  likely 
simultaneous,  and  deprived  him  of  strength  to  return  witli 
an  army.  The  Moabites  and  Ammonites  thus  defeated, 
were  easily  held  under  the  sway  of  Israel  by  the  conduct  of 
Ahab  after  the  defeat  of  Benhadad. 

Three  years  elapsed  after  the  conclusion  of  peace  between 
Ahab  and  Benhadad,  and  yet  the  latter  had  not  executed 
the  stipulations  of  that  treaty.  He  held  Ram  ah  in  Gilead, 
and  most  likely  many  other  places  in  the  provinces  beyond 
Jordan.  This  was  not  only  an  impediment  to  the  communica- 
tions between  Israel  and  Moab,  but  also  threatening  to  Judah. 
Being  a  violation  [of  a  treat}-,  Jehoshaphat,  at  the  request 
of  Ahab,  joined  his  army  to  that  of  the  king  of  Israel  to  take 
Eamah  from  the  hands  of  Syria.  When  Jehoshaphat  was  in 
Samaria  with  Ahab,  the  latter  assembled  four  hundred  of  the 
prophets  to  ask  their  advice  in  the  matter.  They  unanimously 
advised  bim  to  go  to  war,  and  predicted  success.  Jehosha- 
phat suspected  the  sincerity  of  that  council  and  desired  to  see 
another  prophet  of  the  Lord.  Michiah,  son  of  Jemleh,  was  sent 
for,  and  he  was  disliked  by  Ahab,  because  he  always  predicted 
evil  to  him.  Meanwhile  the  council  of  the  prophets,  headed 
by  Zidekiah,  son   of  Chenaanah,   insisted   upon    the  truth  of 


CHAPTER   X.  453 

their  prediction.     This    lie    expressed   by   peculiar    symbols. 
Michiah  came  and  confirmed  the  statement  of  the  others;  but 
he  did  it  in  such  a  manner,  that  the  king  observed,  that  it  was 
not  his  opinion,  and  therefore  demanded  sternly  of  the  prophet 
to  give  his  own  view  of  the  subject.      Michiah   answered   in 
parables,  which  let  Ahab  know,  that  his  death  was  concluded 
upon  in   the    council    of  the  prophets.     Zidekiah    struck  the 
prophet  on  the  cheek  and  gave  him  the  lie;  Ahab  ordered  him 
to  be  imprisoned,  and  fed  upon  bread  and  water  till  he  returned. 
But    still    Michiah    insisted    upon    his   prediction,    that    tho 
king   of  Israel    would    fall   in  battle.     Ahab    thereupon   took 
every  possible  precaution,  he  secretly  changed  his  dress  before 
the  action.     But  in  vain.     The  Syrian  king  had  given  instruc- 
tion to  two  or  three  ehicftians  of  his  chariots  to  have  no  other 
aim  in  battle  but  the  death  of  the    king   of  Israel.     Was  not 
this  an  understanding  with   that  party  of  the   prophets  which 
spoke  to  Ahab  in  Samaria  ?     The  engagement  before  Raman  in 
Gilead    commenced;    the    chariots   ordered  for  that   purpose 
reached  Jehoshaphat,   and  taking  him  to  be  the  king  of  Israel, 
bore  down  upon  him;  but  they  became  soon  convinced  of  their 
mistake.     They  could  not   find  Ahab  among  the  multitude  as 
he  was   in  disguise.     But  one  man  (Syrian  or   Israelite?)  shot 
at  the  king,  and  the  arrow  hit  him  between  the  joints  of  the 
harness.     Our  historian  informs  us  that  the  man  shot  at  a  ven- 
ture ;  but  the  facts  coincide  so  well  with  the  words  of  Michiah, 
and  the  delusive  council  of  prophets  in  Samaria,  that  there  can 
be  no  doubt  the  death  of  Ahab   was  a  willful  and  premeditated 
murder. 

In  the  execution  of  Naboth,  Ahab  acted  not  half  so  atrociously 
as  David  did  in  case  of  Bath  Shcba.  Still,  the  leaders  of  the 
nation  then  acted  more  wisely.  Ahab  had  saved  Israel  from 
the  hands  of  Benhadad,  and  had  it  not  been  for  the  treachery 
of  Benhadad  he  had  completed  that  work,  and  the  history  of 
Israel  would  have  taken  a  more  favorable  turn.  Ho  wisely 
and  moderately  governed  the  nation  within  the  limits  of  the 
law  ever  after  the  convention  on  Mount  Carmel ;  and  the  pre- 
sent warfare  was  a  just  one  on  the  side  of  Ahab  and  Jehosha- 


454  PERIOD    IV. 

phat.  This  horrible  regicide  was  not  committed  with  the 
consent  of  all  the  prophets,  as  the  words  of  Michiah  and  of 
Elijah  (I  Kings  xxi,  28,  29)  sufficiently  prove.  There  was  a 
breach  in  the  party  of  the  prophets,  which  we  shall  have  to 
notice  frequently.  The  consequences  of  this  regicide  were 
unfortunate  for  Israel  and  Judah ;  and  when  it  was  learned  in 
the  army,  that  the  king  would  die  in  consequence  of  his 
wound,  the  consternation  was  so  great  that  the  battle-field  was 
abandoned  immediately.  We  shall  have  to  record  afterwards 
the  loss  of  Ammon,  Moab  and  Edom,  in  consequence  of  the 
act. 

Ahab  was  brought  dead  to  Samaria,  where  he  was  entombed 
by  the  side  of  his  father  Omri,  after  a  reign  of  twenty-one 
years  (887  b.  c),  which  he  signalized  by  the  building  and  for- 
tifying of  several  cities.  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  Beth  ha- 
Shen,  mentioned  in  our  sources,  was  a  new  city,  or  whether  he 
improved  the  fortifications  of  the  old  Beth  Shen,  or  whether 
he  built  a  house  of  ivory.  Ahaziah,  son  of  Ahab,  succeeded 
his  father  on  the  throne  of  Israel. 

Jehoshaphat  went  back  to  Jerusalem,  grieved  by  the  sad 
results  of  the  campaign.  A  prophet,  Jehu,  son  of  Hanani, 
most  likely  the  son  of  Hanani  mentioned  in  the  time  of  Asa, 
met  the  king  and  rebuked  him  on  account  of  his  assisting  Ahab, 
exclaiming,  "  Must  one  assist  the  wicked,  and  didst  thou  love 
the  enemies  of  the  Lord?  for  this  the  wrath  of  the  Lord  is  upon 
thee."  But,  it  appears,  Jehoshaphat  did  not  pay  much  atten- 
tion to  these  words;  for  we  shall  soon  see  him  again  making 
common  cause  with  the  king  of  Israel,  which  prudence  prompted 
him  to  do. 

The  consequences  of  the  loss  sustained  in  Ramah  of  Gilead, 
were  soon  felt.  The  people  of  Ammon  and  Moab,  supported 
by  the  Syrians,  rose  in  a  general  insurrection  under  their  king 
Meshah,  and  the  loss  of  the  large  tribute  formerly  paid  to 
Israel  by  that  province  (II  Kings  iii,  4),  was  a  consequence  of 
it.  Ahaziah  could  make  no  attempt  to  quell  the  insurrection ; 
for  on  the  east  side  of  Jordan,  he  was  cut  off  from  that  terri- 
tory by  the  Syrian  army.     He  could  only  march  through  Judah 


CHAPTER    X.  455 

and  Edom,  to  which  Jehoshaphat  gave  no  permission;  for  the 
friendly  relations  between  the  royal  houses  of  Israel  and  Judah 
were  interrupted  by  the  policy  of  Ahaziah.  This  is  conceivable 
in  the  refusal  of  Jehoshaphat  to  enter  with  the  latter  into  a 
common  expedition  to  Tarshish  (I  Kings  xxii,  50),  although 
the  fleet  of  Jehoshaphat  was  destroyed  by  storm  a  little  before. 
Then  such  an  assistance  would  have  been  welcome  to  the  king  of 
Judah,  if  offered  by  another  king;  but  he  could  not  make  com- 
mon cause  with  Ahaziah,  although  such  a  mutual  understanding 
existed  at  the  beginning  of  Ahaziah's  reign.  The  misfortune 
sustained  at  sea  was  ascribed  to  that  sinful  alliance,  and  so 
Jehoshaphat  was  induced  to  suspend  it. 

The  policy  of  Ahaziah  was  that  of  Ahab  when  he  mounted 
the  throne,  and  most  likely  for  the  same  reasons.  Ahaziah 
certainly  hated  the  prophets  and  their  party  on  account  of  the 
miserable  end  of  his  father;  and,  like  his  father,  he  did  not 
know  how  to  distinguish  friends  from  enemies.  Ahab  con- 
sidered Elijah  and  Michiah  his  enemies,  and  those  who  assas- 
sinated him  he  considered  his  friends.  Ahaziah  hated  all  of 
them  without  distinction.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  that  endea- 
vors were  made  by  the  party  who  assassinated  Ahab,  to  dethrone 
the  proscribed  dynasty,  in  which  they,  most  likely,  were  not 
countenanced  by  Elijah  and  his  party;  consequently,  Ahaziah 
had  a  second  reason  for  hating  them.  If  we  add  to  this  the 
influence  which  his  mother,  Jezebel,  might  have  exercised  over 
him,  and  the  exhaustion  of  the  people  in  the  previous  wars 
and  famine,  we  shall  find  it  very  natural  that  Ahaziah  made 
the  attempt  and  also  succeeded  in  depriving  the  people  of  their 
ancient  religion,  laws  and  liberties,  which  were  replaced  by 
Tyrian  religion,  laws  and  absolutism.  This  was  an  odious 
innovation,  not  only  to  the  party  of  the  prophets,  but  also  to 
the  people  at  large,  both  in  Israel  and  Jehudah;  and  conse- 
quently, Jehoshaphat  was  obliged  to  withdraw  from  an  alliance 
with  Ahaziah.  In  consideration  of  the  state  of  affairs  as  they 
lay  before  us,  it  is  natural  to  [suppose  that  the  insurrection  in 
Amnion  and  Moab  was  contemplated  ever  since  the  second 
invasion  of  TJenhadad:  but  it  could  not  come  to  an  outbreak,  on 


45G  PERIOD    IV. 

account  of  the  double  loss  sustained  by  the  Syrians  and  the 
defeat  of  the  Ammonites  and  Moabites  by  Jehoshaphat.  But 
when  the  war  against  the  Syrians  was  recommenced,  and  the 
Israelites  were  routed  at  Eamah,  the  insurrection  could  easily 
break  out,  and  it  was  to  the  interest  of  Syria  that  it  should  do 
so.  Therefore  we  believe  that  it  did  'tbreak  out  immediately 
after  the  death  of  Ahab  (II  Kings  i,  1).  Ahaziah  could  not 
attend  to  foreign  affairs,  because  he  was  occupied  in  the  altera- 
tion of  his  internal  policy ;  and  after  those  changes  were  effected, 
the  friendly  relations  with  Jehoshaphat  were  at  an  end,  and  he 
could  not  conduct  an  army  into  the  rebellious  proA'inces.  An 
accident  suddenly  changed  the  state  of  affairs;  Ahaziah  fell 
from  the  battlements  of  his  palace  in  Samaria,  and  became 
dangerously  sick.  It  is  not  stated  in  our  sources,  whether  the 
fall  was  accidental,  or  he  was  thrown  down  by  one  of  his 
enemies,  who  was  about  him  under  the  disguise  of  friendship, 
as  Obadiah  was  about  Ahab ;  the  state  of  things  leads  us  to 
believe  the  latter.  He  sent  messengers  to  inquire  of  the  oracle 
of  Baal  of  Sebub — most  likely  a  small  town  near  Ekron — 
whether  he  would  recover  from  the  disease.  He  had  no  con- 
fidence, it  would  seem,  in  his  own  gods  and  oracles,  and  yet  did 
not  ask  the  prophets.  This  was  not  only  a  proof  of  his  hypocrisy, 
but  also  of  his  contempt  of  the  national  religion.  Elijah,  who  was 
always  well  informed  on  the  state  of  affairs,  met  the  messengers 
of  the  king,  and  bade  them  in  the  name  of  God  to  return  and 
tell  the  king  that  he  would  not  recover  from  his  sickness.  The 
messengers  silently  obeyed — this  is  no  mean  testimony  for  the 
established  authority  of  the  prophets — and  brought  the  serious 
message  to  the  royal  patient,  who  anxiously  inquired  into  the 
outward  appearance  of  the  divine;  and,  on  being  told  that  he 
was  a  hairy  man,  with  a  leathern  girdle  about  his  loins,  he  dis- 
covered in  the  horrid  harbinger  the  supposed  enemy  of  his 
house.  A  band  of  armed  men  were  instantly  dispatched  to 
take  Elijah  prisoner.  But  when  the  soldiers  were  about  ful- 
filling their  duty  according  to  orders,  the  prophet  called  down 
that  fire  from  heaven,  which  once  declared  in  favor  of  popular 
liberty  on  Mount  Carmel,  and  the  soldiers  were  furiously  at- 


CHAPTER    X.  457 

tacked  by  the  populace,  as  once  the  prophets  of  Baal  and 
Astarte  were  on  Mount  Carmel.  A  reinforcement  of  soldiers 
was  of  no  avail;  finally,  a  third  detachment  arrived  and  again 
it  was  in  vain.  Elijah  did  not  recall  his  statement,  nor  could 
the  soldiers  make  him  prisoner.  The  warriors  were  obliged  to 
retire  without  effecting  their  purpose,  leaving  dead  two-thirds 
of  their  number. 

This  occurrence  must  have  caused  Elijah  to  retire  altogether 
from  the  field  of  action.  Occurrences  of  that  nature  were 
inevitable  on  account  of  his  popularity  with  the  people,  and 
his  unpopularity  at  court,  where  he  was  considered  a  danger- 
ous individual.  Still  such  scenes  were  dangerous  in  a  time 
when  Syria  had  taken  a  threatening  attitude,  and  Amnion  and 
Moab  were  in  a  sta,te  of  open  revolution.  Elijah  was  obliged 
to  retire  into  the  solitary  desert,  which  appears  to  have  been 
his  most  desired  abode,  resigning  his  functions  into  the  hands 
of  Elishah,  who  was  respected  at  court  and  esteemed  by  the 
people.  lie  was  the  man  of  the  age.  In  company  with  Elishah, 
who  was  not  welcome  to  the  prophet,  most  likely  desirous  to 
conceal  his  retired  abode,  Elijah  crossed  the  Jordan  in  the 
vicinity  of  Jericho,  and  retired  to  some  solitary  abode,  from 
which  we  will  hear  his  voice  but  once  more  (II  Chron.  xxi,  12). 
The  party  of  the  prophets  informed  that  Elijah  was  trans- 
ported from  the  earth  to  the  regions  of  bliss  and  glory,  venerated 
Elishah  as  the  pupil  and  worthy  successor  of  Elijah,  who  was 
even  supposed  to  be  wiser  and  more  inspired  than  his  master 
(II  Kings,  ii,  9,  10,  12).  Elishah,  after  having  sweetened  the 
waters  of  the  wells  of  Jericho — by  the  very  best  means — that 
of  throwing  a  quantity  of  salt  into  the  wells;  after  having 
been  abused  by  the  children  of  Beth  El,  forty-two  of  whom 
were  afterwards  devoured  by  ferocious  beasts,  which  deed  was 
naturally  ascribed  to  their  sin  committed  against  Elishah;  and 
after  he  had  vistcd  the  sanctified  summits  of  Carmel,  which 
was  a  powerful  declaration  on  the  side  of  Elishah  to  follow 
faithfully  the  instructions  of  his  great  master,  he  went  to 
Samaria  to  exercise  his  influence  over  the  new  king,  which 
Elishah  was  unable  to  do  on  account  of  his  unpopularity  at  court. 


458  PERIOD   IV. 

Ahaziah  died,  as  Elijah  had  predicted,  in  the  second  year  of 
his  reign;  and  in  default  of  male  issue,  his  brother  Jehoram 
mounted  the  throne  of  Israel,  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Jehos- 
haphat  (885,  b.  c).  The  miserable  end  of  his  brother,  the 
scene  occurring  at  the  attempt  to  make  Elijah  a  prisoner, 
and  most  likely  also  the  influence  of  Elishah,  who  stood  at  the 
head  of  a  powerful  party,  caused  Jehoram  to  change  his  policy. 
This  prince  restored  the  Jerobeam  policy,  which,  although  not 
being  altogether  satisfactory  to  the  party  of  the  prophets,  still 
was  welcome  under  present  circumstances,  because  it  restored 
the  Mosaic  laws  to  the  country,  and  abolished  the  obnoxious 
Tyrian  superstition.  Having  thus  reconciled  government  and 
people,  which  was  also  calculated  to  secure  again  the  friend- 
ship of  Judah,  Jehoram  prepared  measures  to  quell  the 
insurrection  in  Amnion  and  Moab.  After  an  adequate  army 
was  organized,  Jehoram  sent  to  Jehoshaphat,  desiring  his  co- 
operation in  the  designed  campaign,  whom  he  found  ready  to 
comply  with  his  desire;  for  the  interests  of  Judah  were,  under 
present  circumstances,  closely  connected  with  those  of  Israel, 
not  only  on  account  of  Edom,  the  revolt  of  which  was  much 
to  be  feared,  as  it  indeed  followed,  if  Aramon  and  Moab  main- 
tain their  independence,  but  also  on  account  of  the  trade  with 
Egypt  as  well  as  with  Arabia  and  Tarshish,  which  Judah 
almost  monopolized,  as  we  shall  see  hereafter,  and  to  which 
end  Judah  was  obliged  to  be  on  good  terms  with  Israel,  almost 
embracing  the  territory  of  Judah  on  the  land  sides.  The 
question  was  now  whether  the  campaign  should  be  undertaken 
at  the  provinces  beyond  Jordan,  which  made  an  attack  upon 
the  Syrians  inevitable,  or  whether  the  way  through  Judah  and 
Edom  should  be  preferred.  Prudence  dictated  the  latter,  which 
was  preferred.  The  united  army  of  Jehoram  and  Jehoshaphat, 
together  with  the  garrisons  of  Edom,  commanded  by  the 
viceroy  of  that  province — one  of  which  appears  to  have  been 
in  every  province  since  the  days  of  David — marched  through 
the  southern  deserts  towards  the  Moabitish  territory.  Their 
progress  was  suddenly  checked  by  the  want  of  water.  The 
prophet  Elishah  being  with  the  army,  was  called  forth  to  save 


CHAPTER    X.  459 

them  from  the  besetting  calamity.  After  having  passed  a 
severe  rebuke  on  the  king  of  Israel  on  account  of  his  parent's 
idolatry,  the  prophet,  well  acquainted  with  the  wilderness  and 
its  peculiarities,  ordered  them  to  dig  wells,  which  at  once 
filled  with  water,  and  the  periodical  rain  soon  supplied  the 
river.  The  red  bottom  of  the  water  and  the  rising  sun  deluded 
the  king  of  Moab  to  mistake  the  water  for  blood,  and  to  be- 
lieve the  allied  armies  fought  against  each  other,  which  em- 
boldened him  to  fall  upon  the  camp  of  the  Israelites,  with  the 
intention  of  spoliating  it,  but  he  was  thrown  back  with  great 
slaughter.  That  injudicious  attack  of  the  Moabites  made  the 
victory  easy  to  the  allied  army  of  Israel.  The  Moabites  retired 
from  place  to  place;  their  cities  were  reduced,  all  the  good 
trees  were  cut  down,  all  the  wells  were  stopped  up,  and  each 
man  of  Israel  cast  his  stone  on  every  good  piece  of  land,  and 
drove  the  king  of  Moab  into  his  last  fortified  city.  The  king 
of  Moab,  in  company  of  seven  hundred  swordsmen,  ventured 
a  desperate  attack  upon  the  division  commanded  by  the  viceroy 
of  Edom,  but  it  was  without  any  other  effect  than  taking 
prisoner  the  son  of  the  viceroy  of  Edom,  whom  he  sacrificed 
on  the  wTalls  of  Rabbah  (Amos  ii,  1).  This  action  informs  us 
of  the  strength  of  the  fortifications  in  which  the  king  of  Moab 
confided.  The  Israelites  could  not  continue  the  siege,  as 
there  was  great  misfortune  in  Israel,  for  Benhadad,  most 
likely  the  second,  on  learning  the  success  of  the  Israelitish 
arms  in  Moab,  again  sent  his  hosts  against  Samaria,  and  the 
king  of  Israel  was  obliged  to  march  his  army  against  the 
Syrians,  and  Moab,  though  desolated,  was  independent. 

Elishah's  activity  and  vigilance  saved  Jehoram  from  a  dis- 
astrous surprise.  For  Jehoram  on  returning  to  Samaria 
resolved  upon  attacking  the  Syrians,  who  had  secretly  occu- 
pied the  roads  on  which  the  army  of  Israel  had  to  pass  the 
Jordan,  in  order  to  reach  the  Syrian  army  which  still  remained, 
in  the  provinces  beyond.  Elishah  and  his  disciples  had  establish- 
ed a  new  settlement  in  that  region  of  the  country,  and  conse- 
quently he  had  a  chance  to  learn  the  motions  of  the  enemy,  of 
which  he  informed  the  king,   who  immediatelv  returned  from 


460  PERIOD    IV. 

Moab,  and  convinced  himself  of  the  truth  of  Elishah's  state- 
ment, and^adopted  a  plan  of  action  counteracting  the  secret 
plan  of  Benhadad.  The  monarch,  thinking  he  had  a  traitor 
among  his  officers,  accused  them  of  having  betrayed  his  plans 
to  the  king  of  Israel,  upon  which  he  was  told  that  it  was 
Elishah,  who  knew  all  the  secret  transactions  of  his  court. 
The  Syrian  king,  on  learning  that  Elishah  was  in  Dothan,  in 
the  vicinity  of  which  place  most  likely  the  new  settlement 
was,  dispatched  a  body  of  armed  men  to  take  Elishah  prisoner. 
The  Syrian  detachment  arrived  in  the  vicinity  of  Dothan  early 
in  the  morning,  and  the  town  was  not  strong  enough  to  hold 
out  until  assistance  could  arrive  from  Samaria.  The  demand 
of  the  Syrian  detachment  was  learned,  and  there  appeared  no 
way  for  Elishah  to  escape.  But  presence  of  mind  saved  the 
prophet.  The  man  of  God  went  out  to  the  Syrians,  succeeded 
in  persuading  them  that  he  was  not  the  man,  that  this  was  not 
the  town  they  sought,  and  promised  to  guide  them  to  the  right 
place. 

The  Syrians,  among  whom  most  likely  were  many  friends]  of 
the  prophet,  were  deceived  by  the  eloquence  and  boldness  of 
Elishah;  they  followed  him,  and  he  led  them  away  into  the  city 
of  Samaria.  Jehoram  on  seeing  the  Syrian  host  asked  the 
prophet,  "  Shall  I  beat  them,  my  father?"  But  Elishah 
answered  this  question  in  the  negative,  and  on  his  request 
they  were  hospitably  entertained  and  suffered  to  return  to  their 
king,  who  was  now  convinced  that  it  was  impossible  to  effect 
any  thing  in  Israel  by  stratagem  or  small  detachments,  sent 
a  strong  army  against  Samaria.  This  succeeded  in  hemming 
in  the  Israelitish  army  and  their  king  at  Samaria,  so  that  they 
could  not  escape;  and  also  cut  off  all  communications  between 
the  city  and  the  country.  This  brought  on  such  a  dreadful 
famine  in  the  city,  that  the  inhabitants  resorted  to  human  flesh, 
and  a  woman  was  even  supposed  to  have  boiled  and  eaten  her 
own  son.  A  complaint  which  was  brought  before  the  king  by 
a  woman,  that  she  had  given  up  her  son  for  food  on  condition 
that  another  woman  should  do  the  same  with  her  son,  shows 
how  the  famine  raged  in  the  city.     The  answer  of  the  king, 


CHAPTER    X.  461 

"Jehovah  docs  not  help  thee,  how  shall  I  do  it,"  confirms 
our  view,  that  the  Jerobcam  schism  was  not  a  denial  of  Jeho- 
vah. The  king,  on  learning  the  horrid  state  of  suffering 
in  the  city,  concluded  to  have  Elishah  killed,  who  presided 
over  the  national  council  which  opposed  the  surrender  of  the 
place,  expecting  aid  from  abroad.  Elishah,  who  had  friends  in 
all  places,  was  informed  of  the  intention  of  the  king,  and  that 
men  were  already  dispatched  to  kill  him.  He  announced  to 
the  council  the  intention  of  the  king,  and  the  doors  of  the 
house  were  locked.  The  men  sent  by  the  king,  finding  no  ad- 
mission, the  king  himself  came  and  uttered  his  complaints 
thus;  "  Behold  this  evil  is  from  Jehovah,  why  should  we  any 
longer  wait  for  Jehovah?"  But  the  prophet  assured  the  king 
that  succor  would  come  within  twenty-four  hours. 

This  was  doubted;  nevertheless  the  succor  came,  the  Syrian 
host  was  suddenly  recalled  by  the  king  of  Syria.  Elishah  on 
seeing  the  success  of  Benhadad's  army,  and  anticipating  the 
danger  which  threatened  Samaria,  hastened  to  Damascus,  where 
he  found  Benhadad  dangerously  sick.  On  learning  that  Eli- 
shah had  arrived,  the  Syrian  king  sent  to  him  his  superior 
officer,  Hazael,  to  inquire  of  the  prophet  if  he  would  recover. 
The  prophet  answering  in  the  negative,  looked  into  the  face  of 
Hazael  and  wept  before  him.  On  being  asked  the  reason, 
Elishah  answered  that  he  knew  what  harm  Hazael  would  do  to 
Israel,  "  Their  strongholds  wilt  thou  set  on  fire,  and  their 
young  men  wilt  thou  slay  with  the  sword,  and  wilt  dash  their 
children,  and  rip  up  their  women  with  child."  Hazael  denied 
having  such  intentions,  upon  which  the  prophet  announced  the 
message,  "Jehovah  has  shown  thee  to  me  king  of  Syria." 
Hazael  returned  to  the  palace,  the  king  died  the  next  morning, 
and  Hazael  was  proclaimed  king  of  Syria;  in  this  the  prophet 
and  his  friends  in  Damascus  certainly  had  a  great  share. 
Meanwhile  Elishah  returned  to  Samaria  and  promised  succor 
to  the  king  and  the  suffering  people  of  Samaria,  which  indeed 
came,  as  the  prophet  had  predicted.  1  [azael,  grateful  to  Elishah 
and  to  his  party,  suddenly  recalled  the  besieging  army,  who 
knew  of  no  Other  cause  for  this  than  that  the  king  of  Israel 


4G2  PEKIOD    IV. 

must  have  hired  foreign  armies  to  fight  against  them  whose 
approach  they  supposed  they  already  heard,  and  therefore  broke 
up  the  camp  in  haste  and  retired  in  silence  under  the  cover  of 
night.  That  sudden  retreat  is  also  to  be  ascribed  to  the  dis- 
tressing famine  of  seven  years  duration  then  raging  in  Israel, 
so  that  the  besieging  army  also  suffered  much  for  want  of  pro- 
visions, and  therefore,  glad  of  the  orders  to  break  up  the  siege, 
retired  hastily  to  places  where  provisions  were  more  abundant. 

Four  leprous  persons,  who,  according  to  the  laws  of  Moses, 
were  in  the  hospital  without  the  walls  of  the  city,  driven  by 
hunger,  went  to  the  Syrian  camp,  which  they  found  deserted, 
and  filled  with  many  valuable  articles.  Those  four  men  gave 
notice  to  the  city  sentinel  of  the  strange  occurrence,  who  in- 
formed the  king  of  it;  and  after  assuring  himself  that  it  was 
not  a  stratagem  of  Syria,  he  ordered  the  city  gates  to  be 
opened,  and  Samaria  was  saved  by  the  prudence  and  activity 
of  Elishah,  whose  influence  at  the  courts  of  Samaria  and  Da- 
mascus, and  whose  general  popularity  is  finely  narrated  in  II 
Kings. 

In  order  to   have  a  proper  understanding   of  the   history  of 
the  last  campaign,  we  must  review  the  history  of  Judah  up  to 
that  date.     The  expedition  against  Moab  most  likely  did  not 
take  place  before   the  second  or  third  year   of  Joram,   king  of 
Israel;  nor  was  the  campaign  ended  before  the   fourth  year  of 
Joram,  which  was  about   the   last  year  of  Jehoshaphat,   who 
died  in  the   fifth  year  of  Joram,  after  a  reign   of  twenty-five 
years,  aged  about   sixty.     He  was   succeeded  by  his  son  Jeho- 
ram  (882  b.  c),  the  son-in-law  of  Ahab,  who  was  at  the   time 
thirty-two  years  of  age.     This  prince  did  not  follow  the  wise 
example  of  his  father  and  grand-father,  although  the  policy  of 
the  former  had  proved  every  way  beneficial  to  the  nation.     He 
commenced  his  reign  by  assassinating  his  brothers,  to  whom  his 
father  had  bequeathed  considerable  wealth,  and  had  made  them 
commanders  of   fortified   cities.      Jehoram   then    adopted   the 
Tyrian  worship  and  form  of  government,  which  gave   general 
dissatisfaction;  so   that    he   lost  entirely  the  affections  of  the 
people.     A   letter   of  the  prophet  Elijah,  in  which  the   aged 


CHAPTER    X.  463 

prophet  strongly  censured  the  conduct  of  the  king,  and  pre- 
dicted to  him  a  miserable  end,  was  of  no  effect.  The  dissatis- 
faction of  the  people  and  most  likely  the  inability  of  Jehoram 
to  wield  the  scepter,  favored  an  insurrection  in  the  depending 
provinces.  Edom,  that  had  belonged  to  Judea  at  least  one 
hundred  and  forty  years,  and  the  most  precious  jewel  in  the 
Da  vidian  crown,  revolted  against  Jehoram  and  appointed  an 
independent  king.  Jehoram  did  not  acknowledge  the  independ- 
ence of  Edom  without  a  severe  contest;  he  invaded  that 
country  and  succeeded  in  surprising  and  defeating  the  insur- 
rection. But  he  could  not  reoccupy  the  land  because  the 
people  utterly  disapproved  of  his  undertaking.  "And  the 
people  fled  to  their  tents."  Edom  succeeded  in  maintaining 
its  independence;  and  this  encouraged  the  Phelistines  and 
the  Arabian  chiefs  in  the  south  of  Judea,  not  only  to  revolt, 
but  also  to  invade  and  plunder  Judah.  The  provinces  con- 
quered by  David  were  thus  lost,  the  treasury  was  emptied, 
and  the  nation  deprived  of  the  commercial  interests  connected 
with  the  sea  ports  and  the  land  route  to  Egypt.  This  occa- 
sioned great  misery. 

That  the  dissatisfaction  of  the  nation  with  Jehoram's  sudden 
change  of  policy  was  one  of  the  chief  causes  of  the  success  of 
revolting  provinces,  is  made  evident  by  the  revolt  of  Libnah, 
a  town  in  the  southern  part  of  Judah,  and  inhabited  by  priests* 
The  inhabitants  of  that  place  made  common  cause  with  Edom 
and  succeeded  in  making  themselves  independent  of  Judah. 
That  these  wars  lasted  a  long  time  is  proved  not  only  by  the 
exhaustion  of  the  national  treasury,  but  also  by  the  fact  that 
all  the  sons  of  Jehoram  except  one,  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
enemy.  After  an  inglorious  reign  of  eight  years,  Jehoram  died 
and  was  buried  in  the  sepulcher  of  his  fathers  without  receiving 
the  usual  honors  of  a  king.  The  people  could  not  mourn  over 
the  death  of  a  sovereign  who  had  ruined  them. 

Ahaziah  was  the  only  son  left  by  Jehoram.  He  must  have 
been  extremely  unpopular  on  account  of  his  being  the  grandson 

*  Joshua  xv,  42 -,  xxi,  13. 


464  PERIOD    IV. 

of  Ahab  by  his  daughter  Athaliah.  It  was  not  the  people, 
but  only  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  who  elevated  him  to 
the  throne.  We  have  no  account  that  the  people  generally 
sanctioned  this  act  of  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem.  The 
apprehensions  of  the  people  proved  to  be  well  founded ;  Ahaziah 
was  but  twenty-two  years  old  when  he  mounted  the  throne.  He 
depended  upon  his  mother  Athaliah,  and  his  grandmother 
Jezebel;  and,  as  a  matter  of  course,  the  Tyrian  worship  and 
policy  was  rigorously  maintained,  to  the  detriment  of  the  nation. 
Jehoram  could  not  assist  the  king  of  Israel  against  Syria, 
because  he  was  continually  employed  on  his  own  account 
against  Edom,  Phelistia  and  the  Arabian  provinces.  Now  after 
every  thing  was  lost,  Ahaziah  could  assist  the  king  of  Israel 
against  the  Syrians,  who  still  occupied  Ramah  in  Gilead.  It  is 
evident,  that  neither  Israel  nor  Judah  could  regain  the  lost 
provinces  as  long  as  they  were  backed  by  Syria.  But  it  is  no 
less  evident  that  Israel,  impoverished  by  famine,  and  by  severe 
losses  in  Moab,  and  against  the  Syrians,  and  Judah,  no  less 
enfeebled  and  destitute,  were  not  in  the  position  to  attack  the 
Syrians  with  the  least  hope  of  success.  Hazael,  as  we  have 
remarked  before,  had  suspended  hostilities  against  Israel,  which 
most  likely,  also,  was  the  cause  of  the  present  peace  in  Judah, 
and  it  was  to  be  expected  that  he  would  not  renew  his  attack 
speedily,  because  he  was  elevated  to  the  royal  dignity  by  the 
influence  of  Elishah,  who  had  induced  him  not  to  besiege 
Israel.  Prudence,  therefore,  dictated  the  monarchs  of  Israel  and 
Judah  to  maintain  peace  and  cultivate  the  friendship  of  Hazael, 
until  the  nation  had  regained  its  strength.  This  seems  to  have 
been  the  advice  of  Elishah;  but  it  did  not  suit  the  will  of  the 
princes.  They  broke  the  peace  with  Syria  by  a  united  attack 
upon  Ramah  in  Gilead,  which  resulted,  not  only  in  a  defeat  of 
the  Israelitish  army,  but  also  in  a  series  of  misfortunes,  which 
we  shall  hereafter  mention. 

The  family  of  Ahab  had  added  a  new  wound  to  the  many 
which  they  had  already  inflicted  upon  the  nation.  They  had 
exhausted  the  patience  of  Elishah  and  his  party,  and  they  were 
ready  for  destruction.     The  chance  soon  offered;  the  armies 


CHAPTER    X.  465 

were  united  before  Ramali  in  Gilead,  the  king  of  Israel  was 
lying  wounded  in  his  palace  at  Jezreel,  at  the  very  spot  where 
Naboth  bled;  his  nephew,  the  king  of  Judah,  was  also  present, 
the  whole  seductive  and  misguided  family  could  be  destroyed 
at  one  blow.  Elishah  improved  the  chance — he  discharged  a 
painful  duty  as  the  chief  leader  of  a  large  and  dissatisfied 
party,  who  wept  over  the  calamities  of  the  nation — he  sent 
one  of  his  disciples  to  the  camp  near  Ramah  in  Gilead,  to 
anoint  Jehu,  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  king  of  Israel.  The  disciple 
of  Elishah  promptly  fulfilled  his  secret  mission.  When  it  be- 
came known  in  the  camp  that  Jehu  was  anointed  king  of 
Israel  by  the  prophet,  he  was  instantly  proclaimed  by  the 
officers  of  the  army.  The  plan  of  the  party  of  the  prophets 
was  to  extinguish  the  whole  house  of  Ahab,  to  which  also  the 
king  of  Judah  and  his  family  belonged,  and  then  to  reunite  the 
nation.  So  we  understand  the  words  of  the  prophet,  "Thus 
saith  the  Lord  the  God  of  Israel,  I  have  anointed  thee  to  be 
king  of  Jehovah's  people  of  Israel."  Jehu  should  be  king  of 
the  sole  nation  of  Israel  after  the  house  of  Ahab,  now  govern- 
ing both  in  Israel  and  Judah,  was  extinguished. 

Jehu  selected  a  number  of  warriors  from  the  army,  and  rode 
towards  Jezreel.  The  two  kings,  amazed  by  the  furious  haste 
in  which  he  came,  went  forth  to  meet  him.  Joram  saluted 
Jehu,  with  the  customary  "  Is  peace,  Jehu?  "  To  this  the  lat- 
ter harshly  responded,  telling  him,  there  could  be  no  peace  on 
account  of  his  mother's  inchastity  and  witchcraft.  Joram 
fled  and  told  his  nephew  to  do  the  same,  for  there  was  a  con- 
spiracy; but  Jehu  shot  an  arrow  after  the  former,  which  struck 
his  heart,  and  the  dying  king  was  thrown  upon  the  spot,  once 
belonging  to  Naboth.  Ahaziah  fled  through  the  garden  of  the 
palace,  but  Jehu  pursued  him  and  shot  him  at  the  height  near 
Jibleam.  The  wound  proved  fatal,  and  the  king  of  Judah  died 
on  reaching  Megido.  The  sons  of  the  brothers  of  Ahaziah 
shared  the  same  fate,  and  the  whole  family  of  Ahab,  reigning  in 
Judah,  with  the  exception  of  Athaliah,  was  extinguished. 
Jehu  then  returned  to  Jezreel,  where  Jezebel  was  thrown  into 
the  street  from  the  window  of  her  palace.  Jehu  then  wrote 
30 


466  PERIOD   IV. 

letters  to  Samaria,  commanding  the  ciders  of  the  city  and 
province,  and  the  officers  of  the  king  to  select  one  of  the  family 
of  Ahab  to  be  successor  to  the  throne.  The  elders  and  officers 
were  afraid  of  Jehu,  and  they  sent  him  word  that  they  would 
serve  him  and  no  other  man.  Upon  this  Jehu  ordered  them  to 
send  him  the  heads  of  all  the  members  of  the  royal  family, 
which  demand  was  instantly  complied  with,  and  seventy  heads 
were  sent  to  Jehu  at  Jezreel.  These  he  exhibited  to  the  peo- 
ple in  his  own  excuse,  as  though  the  elders  and  royal  officers  of 
Samaria  had  done  it  of  their  own  accord,  in  compliance  with 
the  decree  of  Elijah.  Jehu  found  an  accomplice  in  the  person 
of  Jonadab,  son  of  Rechab,  father  of  the  Rechabitcs,  with 
whom  he  went  to  Samaria.  There  he  put  to  the  sword  who- 
ever was  favorably  disposed  towards  the  house  of  Ahab.  Not 
yet  satisfied,  Jehu  also  assembled  from  the  country  all  the 
friends  of  the  overthrown  government,  under  the  treacherous 
pretext  of  having  a  great  feast  of  Baal.  The  friends  of  the 
old  government  came  to  Samaria;  and  when  they  were  assem- 
bled in  the  temple  of  Baal,  they  were  massacred  in  cold  blood; 
after  this  the  Baal  temple  and  images  were  destroyed.  This 
cruel  butchery  of  Jehu  fills  the  mind  with  disgust;  but  it  is 
one  of  those  horrible  scenes  that  occur  so  often  in  history.  The 
massacres  by  Marius,  Sulla,  Ceasar,  Brutus  and  Octavius,  were 
much  more  atrocious  than  this  of  Jehu's;  but,  still,  they  do 
not  receive  so  general  condemnation  by  historians.  The  reason 
is,  because  they  can  not  accustom  themselves  to  the  idea,  that 
the  history  of  Israel  is  of  the  same  nature  as  the  history  of 
France,  or  of  any  other  country,  that  Jehu  was  no  worse  a  man 
than  Cromwell,  and  the  party  of  the  prophets  was  no  worse  than 
the  Independents  of  England.  There  was  a  change  of  dynas- 
ties; parties  fought  for  principles,  and  blood  was  shed.  This 
is  the  whole  sum  of  it. 

This  was  the  tragical  catastrophe  of  the  third  dynasty  of 
Israelitish  kings.  They  had  misgoverned  the  nation,  ruined 
the  country,  impoverished  the  people,  and  caused  their  own 
destruction  (873  b.  c).  None  of  them  was  left  but  Athaliah. 
All  this   was  chiefly  the  work  of  one  treacherous,   vain   and 


CHAPTER    XI.  467 

obnoxious  woman,  Jezebel;  whose  passions  were  indomitable, 
who  governed  her  husband,  her  sons,  and  her  son-in-law,  and 
her  grandson  to  their  own  detriment,  and  to  the  misfortune  of 
the  whole  nation. 


CHAPTER  XT. 

FROM    THE  EXPIRATION    OF   THE    OMRI   DYNASTY    TO  THE 
FALL  OF  SAMARIA.     (873-721,  b.  c.) 

Athaliah,  mother  of  the  king  of  Judah,  saw  her  son  brought 
dead  to  Jerusalem,  where  he  was  buried  honorably,  on  account 
of  having  been  a  grandson  of  Jehoshaphat.  She  assembled 
the  members  of  the  DavidiaU  family  who  escaped  the  havoc 
made  among  them  previously,  and  persuaded  them  to  confer 
upon  her  the  royal  dignity  in  order  to  save  the  family.  The 
royal  descendants,  consisting  of  females  and  of  princes  under 
age,  dreaded  undoubtedly,  the  approach  of  Jehu,  and  the 
disaffections  of  the  people.  Knowing  the  abilities  of  the 
shrewd  woman  to  maintain  that  dignity,  they  consented  to  her 
demand.  But  as  soon  as  Athaliah  had  assumed  the  reins  of 
government,  she  condemned  to  death  all  the  male  issues 
remaining  of  the  house  of  David.  The  princess'Jehoshabeath, 
the  wife  of  the  high  priest  Jehoiada,  succeeded  in  saving  Joash, 
the  infant  son  of  Ahaziah,  and  concealed  him  and  his  nurse  in 
the  temple.  Had  Jehu  now  made  peace  with  Syria  and 
invaded  Judah,  he  would  have  undoubtedly  succeeded.  In  vain 
did  the  party  of  the  prophets  promise  that  the  throne  should 
be   secured   to  his    family  to  the  fourth  generation j^he  was 


468  PERIOD    IV. 

intoxicated  by  his  success  against  the  Omri  dynasty,  and  con- 
tinued the  war  against  Hazael,  with  the  intention  probably  of 
invading  Judah,  after  having  recovered  from  Hazael  the  pro- 
vince beyond  Jordan.  But  Jehu  never  could  expel  the  Syrians 
from  those  provinces;  the  whole  land  east  of  Jordan,  from  the 
Creek  of  Arnon  to  the  Mountains  of  Bashan,  was  lost.  The 
people  of  that  district  were  treated  cruelly  by  the  Ammonites 
(Amos  i,  13),  and  many  of  them  were  sold  into  slavery  or 
condemned  to  hard  labor  by  the  Syrians  (ibid  i,  3).  This  con- 
quest was  not  completed  during  the  reign  of  Jehu.  History 
ascribes  some  part  of  it  to  the  reign  of  his  son.  Jehu  died  in 
Samaria  after  an  inglorious  reign  of  twenty-eight  years  (845 
b.  c.)  and  was  succeeded  by  Jehoahaz  his  son.  Nothing  had 
been  gained  by  the  extinction  of  the  Omri  dynasty.  The 
nation  remained  divided  into  two  kingdoms.  The  schism  of 
Jerobeam  was  supported  by  Jehu.  The  country  was  in  as 
unprosperous  a  condition  after  the  death  of  Jehu  as  it  was  after 
the  assassination  of  Jehoram.  Athaliah  after  having  usurped 
the  throne  of  Judah,  followed  in  the  path  of  her  mother,  main- 
taining in  Jerusalem  a  temple  and  numerous  altars  of  Baal ; 
having  appointed  Nathan  her  high  priest,  the  laws  of  the  land 
were  suspended,  and  the  will  of  the  sovereign  substituted  for 
them.  This  was  a  state  of  things  which  the  people  of  Israel 
never  suffered  for  a  long  time.  Still  it  was  the  wisest  policy 
which  Athaliah  could  adopt;  she  was  hated  by  the  people  on 
account  of  her  parents  as  well  as  on  account  of  her  husband 
and  her  son,  who  most  likely  would  have  never  mounted  the 
throne  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem ;  and 
that  hatred  certainly  increased  after  she  had  assassinated  all 
the  princes  of  the  house  of  David.  Had  she  suffered  the  laws 
of  Moses  to  be  set  in  force,  she  would  have  been  the  first  who 
would  have  felt  most  severely  their  strict  justice,  as  she  was 
not  only  guilty  of  crimes  which  the  law  punishes  with  death, 
but  was  also,  according  to  that  law,  destitute  of  all  claim  to 
the  crown.  She  had  either  to  fall  or  maintain  herself  by  the 
severe  rule  of  absolutism.  The  latter  was  preferred.  Athaliah 
must  have  been  a  woman  of  extraordinary  talent  and  energy ; 


CHAPTER    XI.  469 

for  sho  maintained  herself  for  more  than  six  years  upon  the 
throne,  against  the  will  of  the  people  and  the  priests.  The 
fact,  that  only  the  people  of  the  country  participated  in  the 
conspirac}-  against  her,  and  that  only  the  people  of  Jerusalem 
elevated  Ahaziah  to  the  throne,  leads  us  to  look  into  the  state 
of  corruption  that  predominated  in  Jerusalem.  The  Tyrian 
form  of  worship  and  government,  connected  with  the  vilest 
excess,  debauchery  and  extravagance,  was  especially  well  calcu- 
lated to  please  the  corrupted  taste  of  a  degenerated  capital, 
and  therefore  Athaliah,  reinforced  by  fugitives  from  Israel, 
could  maintain  herself  six  years   upon  the  throne  of  Judah. 

The  interests  of  no  class  of  the  people  were  so  much  affected 
by  that  innovation  as  those  of  the  priests  and  the  Levites, 
The  fact  that  the  high  priest's  wife  was  a  princess  of  the  house 
of  David,  shows  that  the  sacerdotal  office  was  in  high  estima- 
tion in  Judah. 

Jehoiada,  the  high  priest,  was  the  man  who  secretly  organ- 
ized a  conspiracy  against  the  obnoxious  queen.  He  first  com- 
municated his  plan  to  five  captains  of  the  royal  guard  (II 
Chron.  xxiii)  who  traveled  through  the  country  and  succeeded 
in  bringing  a  great  number  of  the  dissatisfied  people  to  Jeru- 
salem. Jehoiada  meantime  won  over  to  his  plan  the  Levites 
who  had  the  service  of  the  week,  and  those  which  came  to 
replace  them,  being  nearly  two  thousand  men.  After  the  plan 
was  thus  far  matured,  he  guided  the  multitude  into  the  court 
of  the  temple  showing  them  the  infant  prince,  Joash,  and 
causing  them  to  take  a  sacred  oath  before  the  Lord  to  support 
the  young  king  and  the  law.  After  this  was  done,  arms  were 
distributed  among  the  people ;  the  gates  of  the  temple  and  the 
whole  court  were  guarded  by  the  friends  of  the  insurrection. 
The  king  was  led  to  the  royal  tribune  and  crowned  by  the 
high  priest,  under  the  vehement  cheering  of  the  multitude. 
The  news  of  a  great  commotion  in  the  temple  soon  spread 
over  the  city,  the  people  rushed  up,  and  the  queen  came  too, 
to  learn  the  cause  of  the  extraordinary  commotion.  The 
guards  had  orders  to  suffer  none  to  attack  them,  and  it  appears 
none  had  the  courage  to  do  so.     When  Athaliah  saw  the  king 


470  PERIOD    IV. 

on  his  platform,  she  exclaimed  "  treason,  treason"!  tearing 
her  garments.  The  excited  multitude  would  have  most  likely 
torn  her  in  pieces,  had  not  the  high  priest  commanded  the  mnot 
to  kill  her  in  the  temple.  The  queen  was  led  back  to  her 
palace,  and  killed.  It  was  the  seventh  year  of  her  reign. 
Joash  mounted  the  throne,  being  but  seven  years  old,  under 
the  regency  of  the  high  priest  Jehoiada.  The  covenant  be- 
tween God,  the  king,  and  the  people  was  solemnly  renewed, 
which  means,  that  the  oath  of  allegiance  was  taken  on  the 
side  of  the  people,  and  that  the  king  swore  to  the  laws  of  the 
land,  which  he  was  bound  to  administer,  and  to  regard  in  his 
individual  transactions  as  the  faithful  representative  of  God. 
The  country  people  destroyed  the  temple  and  altars  of  Baal. 
Mathan  suffered  death,  and  probably  many  more  of  the  priests 
of  Baal,  although,  on  the  whole,  the  revolution  cost  but  very 
few  lives.  Our  authorities  say,  "  The  country  people  rejoiced, 
and  the  city  was  quiet."  The  city  certainly  did  not  rejoice 
much  in  this  sudden  change. 

It  might  appear  rather  singular,  that  no  voice  of  a  prophet 
was  heard  in  this  revolution  so  favorable  to  the  Mosaic  law. 
But  we  have  accounted  previously  for  this  silence.  Jehu  was 
anointed  by  Elishah.  Consequently  they  could  not  counte- 
nance a  revolution,  which  directly  opposed  their  will  to  unite 
the  whole  nation.  Still  they  could  not  well  oppose  that  revolu- 
tion, for  it  was  in  favor  of  the  very  laws  which  they  zealously 
protected.  If  we  may  draw  conclusions  from  the  general 
tenor  of  their  words  and  conduct,  we  are  enabled  to  state, 
that  they  by  no  means  rejoiced  much  in  the  dominion  of  priests, 
to  whom  they  never  were  very  friendly ;  nor  could  the  corona- 
tion of  an  infant  king  meet  with  their  approbation;  their 
choice  always  fell  upon  active  and  energetic  men ;  nor  could 
;hcy  truly  rejoice  in  any  national  measure  which  tended  to 
naintain  the  schism. 

The  policy  of  Jehoiada  may  readily  be  anticipated;  he  placed 
a  strong  garrison  in  the  temple  to  keep  Jerusalem  quiet;  and 
in  all  other  respects  he  was  a  faithful  follower  of  Asa  and 
Jehoshaphat.      The  laws    of  Moses  were   faithfully   adminis- 


CHAPTER    IX.  471 

tcred,  and  the  land  enjoyed  profound  peace  and  tranquility. 
The  king  Joash,  who  appears  to  have  been  an  insignificant 
personage  in  the  government  during  the  lifetime  of  the  high 
priest-regent,  after  having  reached  the  age  of  manhood,  was 
desired  to  repair  the  temple,  which  had  been  much  mutilated 
during  the  reign  of  his  three  immediate  predecessors.  To  this 
end  he  demanded  of  the  priests  to  deliver  up,  to  the  temple 
treasury,  all  those  moneys  which  the  law  appropriated  to 
public  and  sacerdotal  purposes,  and  which  the  priests  illegally 
appropriated  to  themselves,  granting  to  them  the  surplus  after 
the  repairs  should  have  been  completed.  But  in  the  twenty- 
third  year  of  the  reign  of  Joash,  the  temple  treasury  was  as 
empty  as  before,  and  the  repairs  had  not  been  accomplished. 
The  king  became  impatient  and  took  other  measures  to  effect 
his  design.  He  gave  orders  to  the  priests  to  take  no  more 
money  of  the  people,  and  he  himself  undertook  the  necessary 
repairs.  By  order  of  the  high  priest,  a  box  with  a  small  hole' 
at  the  top,  was  placed  at  the  right-hand  side  of  the  altar,  in 
which  the  voluntary  gifts  of  the  people  were  deposited.  An 
edict  was  issued,  that  the  half-shekel  tax,  introduced  by  Moses 
for  sacerdotal  purposes,  should  be  paid,  which  was  also  de- 
posited in  that  box.  After  it  was  filled,  the  king's  scribe  and 
the  high  priest  opened  it,  and  the  money  was  appropriated  to 
repair  and  fortify  the  temple,  which  was  done  by  officers,  of 
whom  no  account  was  required.  The  moneys  were  entrusted  to 
them  upon  their  own  faith,  which  we  should  judge  to  have  been 
an  improper  way  of  disposing  of  the  pubic  funds ;  but  the  king 
had  already  granted  the  surplus  to  the  priests,  and  the  officers 
thus  entrusted  with  the  superintendence  of  that  public  work, 
most  likely  were  but  priests.  Our  annalist  complains,  that 
the  funds  did  not  suffice  to  make  the  silver  and  the  golden 
utensils  of  the  temple.  Jehoiada  died  shortly  after  the  temple 
was  finished,  at  the  advanced  age  of  one  hundred  and  thirty 
years.  Joash  was  no  longer  governed  by  the  inflexible  will  of 
his  aged  patron.  No  sooner  had  he  assumed  independently 
the  reins  of  government  than  he  fell  back  into  the  sins  inher- 
ited of  his  progenitors.     He  gave  a  willing  ear  to  the  flattering 


472  PERIOD     IV. 

princes,  and  attempted  to  suspend  the  laws  and  to  usurp  des- 
potical  power,  with  which  the  introduction  of  idolatry  was 
closely  connected.  The  prince  who  but  a  few  years  before 
manifested  so  much  zeal  on  behalf  of  the  temple  of  God,  in- 
troduced in  Jerusalem  the  image  of  Astarte  and  other  idols, 
and  he  himself  worshiped  them.  This  would  seem  a  great 
inconsistency,  if  we  had  not  seen  it  before  in  Solomon,  lleha- 
beam,  and  Abiam.  The  voice  of  the  prophets,  which  was 
silent  through  the  time  of  repairing  and  fortifying  the  temple, 
made  itself  heard  now.  But  it  was  in  vain;  no  human  voice  is 
strong  enough  to  regenerate  a  corrupted  court  and  capital. 
Sacheriah — the  son  of  the  late  high  priest,  whose  influence 
over  king  and  people  must  have  been  considerable,  on  account 
of  his  deceased  father — mounted  the  public  tribunal  in  the 
court  of  the  temple,  and  in  strong  language  rebuked  the  wick- 
edness of  the  age.  The  king,  probably  fearing  an  insurrection, 
gave  secret  instructions  to  the  corrupted  adherents  to  his  new 
policy  to  stone  to  death  the  prophet,  the  son  of  a  benefactor 
who  had  saved  his  life  and  elevated  him  to  the  throne.  A  riot 
was  made  in  the  court  of  the  temple,  and  the  secret  instruc- 
tions of  the  king  were  faithfully  executed.  The  inspired  man 
of  the  people  died  with  the  words  on  his  lips,  "  God  will  see 
it  and  require  it."  The  king  certainly  affected  ignorance  on 
the  subject.  But  history  is  an  impartial  judge,  and  the  looks  of 
a  nation  are  piercing,  penetrating  into  the  secret  recesses  of  royal 
intrigues;  therefore  the  hatred  of  his  subjects  and  the  con- 
demnation of  history  fell  upon  Joash,  on  account  of  that  black 
crime,  which  has,  no  precedent  in  the  history  of  Israel.  The 
liberty  of  speech  was  the  best  arms  of  which  the  patriots 
made  use  to  defend  the  laws  and  liberties  of  the  nation.  But 
this  sacred  right  was  invaded  at  the  death  of  Sachariah,  and 
the  patriots  looked  despondingly  into  futurity.  The  offended 
nation  soon  found  a  chance  to  liberate  itself  of  that  w icked 
king.  The  king  of  Syria,  Hazael,  invaded  Phelistia,  and 
coming  up  from  Edom,  after  having  taken  Gath,  he  marched 
towards  Jerusalem.  Joash  met  him  with  an  army,  and  was 
himself  wounded  in  the  battle;  he  was  obliged  to  keep  confined 


CHAPTER    XI.  473 

in  a  place  between  Jerusalem  and  Silla,  most  likely  a  summer 
residence  of  the  king.  Whether  llazael  was  or  was  not  invited 
by  the  enemies  of  Joash,  we  will  not  undertake  to  decide. 
At  any  rate,  it  appears  that  Joash  did  not  succeed  in  collecting 
an  army  strong  enough  to  meet  the  enemy  in  battle.  The 
presence  of  a  foreign  army  was  dangerous  to  the  interests  of 
the  king  and  an  encouragement  to  the  people.  Joash,  there- 
fore, thought  it  prudent  to  obtain  peace  at  any  price.  He  took 
all  the  money  which  was  in  the  public  treasury  and  in  the 
royal  coffers,  and  sent  it  to  Damascus,  suing  for  peace,  which 
was  granted.  But  no  sooner  had  the  foreign  army  left  the 
country,  than  his  enemies  caused  his  assassination.  The  late 
Jezreel  scene  was  reenacted  at  Beth  Millo  in  a  ruder  style. 
Two  assassins,  Jozachar  and  Jehozabad,  the  former  an  Am- 
monite and  the  latter  a  Moabite,  came  into  the  bed  chamber  of 
the  king,  and  assassinated  him  who  had  himself  assassinated 
Sechariah.  This  occurred  in  the  fortieth  year  of  his  reign. 
His  son,  Amaziah,  succeeded  to  the  throne  when  he  was 
twenty-five  years  of  age  (818,  b.  c). 

It  has  been  mentioned  before,  that  Jehu,  king  of  Israel,  and 
his  successor,  Jehoahaz,  who  ascended  the  throne  in  the  twenty- 
first  year  of  Joash,  were  almost  continually  engaged  in  de- 
fending the  country  against  the  armies  of  the  powerful  Hazael, 
king  of  Syria,  who  elevated  the  Syrian  monarchy  to  the  highest 
degree  of  splendor.  This  war  ended  in  the  loss  of  the  land 
beyond  Jordan,  and  of  the  invaluable  Bashan.  After  this,  that 
king  directed  his  designs  to  the  south,  invading  Edom,  where 
his  army  took  Elath,  and  most  likely  also  Petrea.  Marching 
thence  into  Phelistia  as  far  as  Gatli,  from  which  point  they 
returned  to  Damascus,  either  on  account  of  the  death  of  Hazael, 
or  on  account  of  the  money  sent  there  by  Joash.  While  Hazael's 
army  was  engaged  in  the  south,  Israel  whose  army  was  reduced 
to  fifty-horse,  ten  chariots,  and  ten  thousand  foot,  enjoyed  a 
period  of  peace,  for  which  probably  they  paid  a  heavy  tribute. 
The  people  recovered  slowly  from  the  long  wars  with  Syria; 
but  the  king  did  not  improve  the  time  of  peace  to  promote  the 
welfare  of  his   people.     He   yielded  to   the  vile  pleasures  of 


474  PERIOD    IV. 

Astarte  worship,  whose  idol  he  secretly  erected  in  Samaria. 
He  died  after  an  inglorious  reign  of  sixteen  years,  and  was 
succeeded  in  the  thirty-seventh  year  of  Joash  by  his  son 
Jehoash,  who' appears  to  have  been  a  strong  monarch,  and  an 
intimate  friend  of  Elishah.  This  is  to  us  a  testimony  of  his 
popularity,  although  our  authorities  regard  him  as  a  wicked 
king  on  account  of  his  maintenance  of  the  Jerobearn  schism. 
Had  he  understood  his  true  interests,  and  invaded  Judah  at 
the  time  when  Joash  was  hated  by  the  people,  he  might  have 
succeeded  in  reuniting  the  nation.  But  his  army  was  prob- 
ably too  weak  at  the  time  of  the  reign  of  Joash,  and  during 
the  reign  of  his  successor  the  opportunity  had  passed,  as  the 
sequel  will  show.  In  the  fourth  or  fifth  year  of  Jehoash,  king 
of  Israel,  Hazael  died,  leaving  the  powerful  monarchy  in  the 
feeble  hands  of  his  son  and  successor,  Benhadad  III,  and  Israel 
was  reanimated  with  the  hope  of  reconquering  the  east-Jordan 
provinces.  Shortly  after  this  the  old  and  venerable  prophet 
Elishah,  the  man  who  had  elevated  to  the  throne,  the  ruling 
dynasties  of  Israel  and  Syria,  and  who  must  have  been  about 
one  hundred  years  of  age,  was  now  taken  sick,  and  his  reco- 
very was  doubtful.  Jehoash,  the  king  of  Israel,  came  down 
to  some  place  on  the  Jordan  in  Ephraim  (II  Kings,  xiii,  20), 
and  finding  Elishah  near  dying,  he  fell  upon  his  face,  and  wept, 
exclaiming  "  My  father,  my  father;  Israel's  chariot  and 
riders!"  From  this  we  learn  both  the  eminent  position  which 
Elishah  held,  and  the  high  regard  paid  to  him  by  the  king. 
Elishah  encouraged  the  king  to  attempt  the  reconquest  of  the 
provinces  beyond  Jordan.  He  died  lamented  by  the  whole 
nation  (about  826  b.  c). 

War  was  now  inevitable ;  for  the  Moabites  undertook  roving 
incursions,  distressing  the  people;  and  a  war  against  Moab 
was  connected  with  a  war  against  Syria,  which  protected  if  it 
did  not  possess  Moab.  Jehoash  invaded  the  provinces  beyond 
Jordan,  and  vanquished  the  Syrians  in  three  battles,  recaptur- 
ing all  the  Israelitish  cities  which  were  in  the  hands  of  Syria. 
And  now  for  the  first  time  since  the  days  of  Baasha,  the  land 
of  Israel  was  again  free  from  foreign  troops. 


CHAPTER    XI.  475 

111  Judah  we  meet  again  a  total  change  of  policy.  Ama- 
ziali  mounted  the  throne  in  the  second  or  third  year  of 
Jehoash.  The  young  king  probably  was  terrified  by  the  tragi- 
cal end  of  his  father,  or  what  is  more  likely  was  forced  by  the 
triumphant  party  of  the  patriots  to  take  the  oath  upon  the 
laws  of  Moses,  to  administer  which  was  his  duty.  According 
to  that  law  the  assassins  of  his  father  were  condemned  to 
death.     Their  children,  however,  were  spared. 

The  progress  of  Jehoash  against  Syria  encouraged  the  king  of 
Judah  to  make  an  attempt  to  recover  Edom  from  the  hands  of 
Syria.  He  armed  the  people,  whose  number  had  decreased 
since  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat  (about  fifty-four  years)  from 
1,160,000,  to  three  hundred  thousand  men,  able  to  bear  arms. 
For  this,  neither  the  wars  of  former  kings  of  Judah,  nor  the 
loss  of  Phelistia,  Edom,  and  other  dependencies,  fully  account. 
It  appears  to  us,  that  in  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat  the  wholo 
people  were  armed,  while  now  only  the  Bahur  or  select  men 
were.  That  the  people  were  disarmed  ever  after  the  death  of 
Jehoshaphat  admits  of  no  doubt;  for  Jehoiada  distributed 
arms  when  revolting  against  Athaliah,  and  Joash  preferred 
paying  a  heavy  sum  to  Hazael  rather  than  arm  the  people. 
Amaziah  appears  to  have  had  the  desire  to  maintain  this  safe 
policy  of  his  predecessors;  but  still  he  desired  to  recover 
Edom,  and  he  hired  one  hundred  thousand  experienced  war- 
riors of  Israel,  for  which  he  paid  one  hundred  talents  of  silver. 
This  was  done  in  secret,  and  the  people  were  only  apprized  of 
it  when  the  warriors  of  Israel  had  reached  the  capital.  This 
policy  greatly  offended  the  people,  and  the  politicians,  aware  of 
the  real  cause  of  that  measure,  opposed  it.  A  prophet  expressed 
to  the  king  the  sentiments  of  the  people.  The  king  was  obliged 
to  send  back  the  Israelitish  troops,  and  to  arm  his  own  people, 
as  has  been  stated  before. 

Amaziah  invaded  Edom  at  the  head  of  his  troops,  and  suc- 
ceeded in  capturing  Petra,  the  capital  of  Edom,  after  he  had 
beaten  the  united  army  of  the  Edomites  and  Syrians,  who  left 
ten  thousand  dead  on  the  battle  field.  After  he  had  taken  the 
city  of  Petra  or  Sela,  which  signifies  the  same,    ten  thousand 


476  PERIOD     IV. 

more  were  hurled  down  from  the  rocks  which  environed  the 
city.  The  city  was  then  called  Jaktheal,  meaning,  God 
reduced  it.  Our  authorities  do  not  inform  us  of  the  causes 
which  produced  such  a  sudden  change  of  fortune  in  the  Syrian 
arms.  That  Syria  possessed  Edom  is  evident  from  II  Kings, 
xvi,  6.  That  it  had  lost  now  the  best  part  of  it  is  no  less 
evident.  It  appears  that  the  dominion  of  Syria  was  limited  to 
Elath,  while  Judah  was  again  in  possession  of  Ezion-gaber  and 
the  road  from  that  port  to  Jerusalem,  as  in  the  times  of Jehosha- 
phat.  Whether  this  double  progress  of  the  Israelitish  arms 
must  be  ascribed  to  the  utter  inability  of  Benhadad  III,  to 
manage  the  affairs  of  his  country,"  or  whether  internal  commo- 
tions in  Syria  lessened  her  influence  abroad,  or  whether  Ben- 
hadad was  concerned  in  a  warfare  with  Assyria  in  the  time 
when  Acrapazus  fought  against  the  Medes,is  difficult  to 
ascertain,  although  the  latter  supposition  is  most  likely.  This 
much  is  certain,  that  Israel's  defence  for  a  whole  century, 
against  the  Syrian,  Idumean,  Moabitish  and  Ammonitish 
armies,  is  a  strong  proof,  that  its  military  strength  has 
been  much  underrated  by  the  writers  on  the  subject,  and 
that  the  numbers  of  the  Book  of  Chronicles  are  by  no  means 
exaggerated  when  taken  in  the  sense  which  we  gave  to 
them. 

Amaziah  returned  triumphantly  to  Jerusalem,  whose  splen- 
dor was  restored  once  more,  for  the  Idumean  sea  port  was 
again  accessible  to  the  merchants  of  Judah,  commerce  flourished 
once  more,  and  wealth  poured  again  into  the  capital.  We  are 
told  in  II  Chronicles  xxv,  14,  that  Amaziah  worshiped  the 
gods  of  Edom,  which  appears  to  us  to  be  a  figurative  express- 
ion relating  to  the  elation  of  the  king  in  consequence  of  his 
victory  in  Edom,  a  victory  which  he  did  not  pursue  to  the  best 
advantage;  for  instead  of  taking  Elath  from  the  Syrians,  he 
declared  war  against  the  king  of  Israel.  This  was  opposed  by 
the  people,  whose  sentiments  a  prophet  declared  to  the  king. 
There  can  be  no  doubt,  that  peace  between  Judah  and  Israel 
would  have  been  now  the  best  policy,  not  only  on  account  of 
the  commercial  interests  of  Judah,  but  also  in  order  to  recover 


CHAPTER    XI.  477 

from  the  misfortunes  which  both  parts  of  the  nation  had 
suffered  during  so  many  years.  But  Amaziah  harshly  silenced 
the  prophet,  threatening  to  put  him  to  death  if  he  continued 
opposing  his  royal  will. 

Again  the  will  of  the  people  was  silenced,  and  the  king  again 
acted  on  his  own  will,  which,  however,  this  time,  was  not  a 
violation  of  the  laws,  for  according  to  the  settled  principle  of 
Judah,  the  kmdom  of  Israel  was  considered  in  a  state  of  revolt 
to  the  Davidian  dynasty.  The  pretext  for  the  declaration  of 
war  was,  that  the  troops  of  Israel,  dismissed  by  Amaziah,  had 
ravaged  the  country.  For  this,  probably,  indemnity  had  been 
demanded,  and  refused  by  the  king  of  Israel  on  the  ground  of 
the  offence  given  to  the  troops  by  Amaziah  in  dismissing  them. 
The  declaration  of  war  was  thus  answered  by  Joash,  "The 
thistle  that  was  in  Lebanon  sent  to  the  cedar  that  was  in  Le- 
banon, saying:  Give  thy  daughter  to  my  son  to  wife;  and 
there  passed  by  a  wild  beast  that  was  in  Lebanon,  and  trod 
down  the  thistle.  Thou  hast  indeed  smitten  Edom,  and  thine 
heart  has  lifted  thee  up ;  be  thou  honored,  and  tarry  at  home : 
why  shouldst  thou  expose  thyself  to  evil,  and  why  shouldst  thou 
fall  and  Judah  with  thee?"  Amaziah's  army  was  encamped  in 
the  vicinity  of  Beth  Shemesh,  a  town  in  Judah,  on  the  frontiers 
of  Dan,  ready  to  invade  the  territory  of  Israel.  But  Joash 
attacked  the  army  of  Judah  and  routed  it  in  a  pitched  battle, 
notwithstanding  the  strong  position  which  Amaziah  occupied. 
He  drove  before  him  the  army  of  Judah  to  Jerusalem,  which  he 
besieged  and  finally  took  by  storm,  having  previously  captured 
king  Amaziah,  whom  he  held  in  custody.  He  razed  four  hun- 
dred cubits'  length  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  from  the  gate  of 
Ephraim  to  the  gate  of  the  corner.  Amaziah  was  thus  forced 
to  sue  for  peace,  which  was  granted  to  him  after  having  paid 
heavy  sums.  Having  delivered  up  to  the  king  of  Israel  a  num- 
ber of  hostages,  the  latter  returned  to  Samaria.  The  policy  of 
Jehoash  was  by  far  superior  to  that  of  Amaziah.  Being  in 
possession  of  Jerusalem,  Jehoash  might  have  succeeded  in  occu- 
pying the  whole  land  of  Judah;  but  it  was  questionable  whether 
those  internal  broils  would  not  have  given  a  new  chance  to 


478  PERIOD    IV. 

Syria  to  invade  the  provinces  beyond  Jordan,  and  Jehoasli  pre- 
ferred to  conclude  an  advantageous  peace  with  Judah,  which 
the  party  of  the  prophets  disliked.  Jehoasli  died  (814  b.  £.), 
shortly  after  this  campaign,  after  a  reign  of  sixteen  or  seven- 
teen years,  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  Amaziah,  leaving  a  strong 
and  prosperous  country  to  his  son  Jerobeam  II,  a  man  who 
proved  to  be  an  efficient  ruler  and  successful  warrior. 

This  prince  encouraged  by  the  prophet  Jonah,  son  of  Ami- 
thai,  of  Gath-Hepher,  a  town  in  Zebulon  (where  the  sepulcher 
of  that  prophet  was  yet  shown  in  the  days  of  Jerome)  con- 
tinued the  war  against  Syria  with  success.  We  are  not  in 
possession  of  any  particulars  of  that  important  campaign. 
According  to  Josephus  it  was  not  successful  in  the  beginning, 
and  this  is  ascribed  to  the  mismanagement  of  Jerobeam  II., 
who  is  said  to  have  been  the  cause  of  ten  thousand  misfortunes 
to  Israel;  but  at  length  the  city  of  Hamath,  or  Emesa,  on  the 
Orontes,  was  taken.  This  was  considered  as  belonging  to  the 
kingdom  of  Israel.  We  are  further  informed  that  he  extended 
the  eastern  frontiers  of  Israel  from  Hamath  to  the  sea  of  the 
Plain,  or  to  Lake  Asphalties,  as  Josephus  says,  and  this 
leaves  us  in  ignorance  of  the  precise  boundary  line,  whether  or 
not  Heliopolis,  Damascus,  Bostra,  and  Philadelphia,  equally 
claimed  by  the  Israelites,  were  included  in  that  line  of  the 
eastern  boundry.  The  fact  that  a  successor  of  Jerobeam  pro- 
ceeded with  his  army  to  the  Euphrates,  and  that  Emesa  could 
hardly  be  reached  without  the  previous  reduction  of  Damascus 
and  Heliopolis,  favors  the  hypothesis,  that  Jerobeam  II,  was  in 
possession  of  those  latter  cities,  and  this  would  indicate  the 
Syrian  desert  to  have  been  the  eastern  boundary  of  Israel  at 
that  time. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  same  prophet  Jonah,  who 
encouraged  Jerobeam  II  to  this  campaign,  preached  in  Nineveh, 
and  that  the  people  of  that  ancient  metropolis  paid  attention 
to  him.  Nahum,  too,  and  Zcphaniah,  we  shall  find  afterwards 
interfering  in  the  affairs  of  Nineveh.  We  can  not  believe  for  a 
moment,  that  a  man  unknown  in  that  city,  without  friends  and 
influence,   should  go  there   on  a  sacred  mission  and  that  he 


CHAPTER    XI.  470 

should  be  listened  to.  The  fact,  therefore,  appears  to  be,  that 
the  influence  and  the  friends  of  the  prophets  reached  beyond 
the  great  rivers  of  Euphrates  and  Tigris ;  that  it  was  by  the 
influence  of  the  prophets  that  Acropazus,  and  after  him  Sar- 
danapalus,  made  war  upon  Syria,  taking  from  Benhadad  III 
Mesopotamia.  Meanwhile  Jerobeam  II  could  successfully 
invade  Syria  and  recover  the  district  between  the  desert  and 
the  Lebanon  mountains.  When  Arbaces  threatened  to  over- 
turn the  Assyrian  empire,  it  was  Jonah's  duty  to  go  again  to 
Nineveh,  and  to  caution  the  king  and  people  to  guard  against 
the  Medes  and  their  leader,  because  it  was  feared  that  the  fall 
of  Assyria  would  give  a  chance  to  Syria  to  recover  its  power 
and  press  again  upon  Israel  and  Judah.  Jonah,  who  reluct- 
antly went  the  first  time  to  the  distant  Nineveh,  preferring  to 
go  to  Tarshish,  from  which  he  was  prevented  by  a  storm, 
went  gladly  the  second  time,  to  Nineveh  (Jonah  iii,  1),  to 
deliver  his  message.  The  fact  that  the  names  of  Omri  and 
Jehu,  kings  of  Israel,  were  found  inscribed  in  the  black  obelisk, 
in  Nineveh,  paying  tribute,  or  bringing  gifts  to  the  king  of 
Assyria,  is  doubted  no  longer.  On  the  same  obelisk  were 
found  the  names  of  the  king  of  Syria,  Hazael,  and  of  Ithbaal, 
father  of  Jezebel  (Literary  Gazette,  March  18,  1852).  This 
fully  entitles  us  to  the  belief,  that  Hazael,  and  his  predecessors, 
were  assisted  by  Assyria;  that  Omri  and  Ithbaal,  and  their 
successors,  and  also  afterwards  Jehu  and  his  son,  were  plun- 
dered by  Hazael,  who  paid  a  certain  tribute  to  Assyria,  not  to 
be  interrupted  in  his  cause  by  an  Assyrian  invasion,  and  that 
the  prophets  succeeded  in  winning  the  king  of  Assyria  in 
favor  of  Israel  and  Judah,  after  Hazael  was  dead. 

While  Jerobeam  II  recovered  the  ancient  glory  to  the  house 
of  Israel,  the  people  of  Judah  were  also  ready  to  rise  once 
more  to  national  glory.  King  Amaziah,  after  having  recovered 
his  throne  from  the  king  of  Israel,  was  disliked  by  the  people, 
and  he  could  only  maintain  himself  upon  the  throne  of  David 
until  one  of  the  royal  princes  was  deemed  capable  of  replacing 
him.  A  revolt  broke  out  in  the  capital,  and  the  king  fled  to 
Lachish  (in  the  third  year  of  Jerobeam  II,  811,  n,  c),   where 


480  PERIOD    IV. 

he  lived  to  the  twenty-seventh  year  of  that  king,  when  for 
unknown  causes  he^was  killed,  and  afterwards  interred  in  the 
sepulchcr  of  his  fathers  in  Zion.  When  Amaziah  had  left 
Jerusalem,  the  royal  dignity  was  unanimously  conferred  upon 
his  son,  Azaria  or  Uziah  (which  two  names  signify  the  same), 
who  was  but  sixteen  years  of  age.  This  time  the  people  of 
Jehudah,  who  appointed  the  king,  were  united  in  their  purpose 
and  most  likely  preferred  the  young  prince  to  his  eldest 
brothers.  The  first  enterprise  of  the  young  king  was  the  capture 
of  Elath,  which  was  to  the  commerce  of  Judah  an  important 
acquisition.  This  appears  to  have  been  the  last  stronghold  of 
the  Syrians  on  the  peninsula,  which  now  rapidly  fell  into  the 
hands  of  Judah.  He  subdued  the  Arabs  and  the  Moabites, 
living  in  that  region,  extending  again  the  western  frontier  of 
Judah  to  the  Heropolitic  gulf.  This  king  built  a  city  on  the 
Red  sea  (probably  Surabit-el-Kadim),  in  which  he  placed  a 
garrison.  The  Syrians  being  cut  off  from  the  southern  coun- 
tries. Phelistia  had  to  submit  again  to  Judah;  the  fortifications 
of  Gath,  of  Jabneh,  and  of  Ashdod  were  razed  to  the  ground, 
which  left  Phelistia  at  the  mercy  of  Judah.  The  Ammonites 
and  Moabites,  who  constituted  but  one  country,  escaped  the 
victorous  arms  of  king  Uziah  by  paying  tribute.  So  the 
ancient  empire  of  David,  as  bounded  by  Moses,  was  restored, 
and  flourished  once  more,  although  under  two  kings,  each  of 
whom  was  prudent  enough  to  maintain  the  internal  peace,  and 
to  raise  the  nation  to  a  high  and  glorious  position. 

Uziah,  we  are  informed,  had  an  army  of  three  hundred  seven 
thousand  and  five  hundred  men,  well  armed  with  swords, 
lances,  shields,  helmers,  brazen  bucklers,  breast  plates,  bows 
and  slings,  besides  the  engines  of  war  for  besieging  cities; 
precisely  the  same  arms,  which  we  meet  up  to  the  discovery  of 
gun  powder.  The  whole  army  was  regulated  by  two  thousand 
and  six  hundred  officers.  After  his  conquests  were  completed, 
Uziah  directed  his  attention  to  internal  improvements.  He 
repaired  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem,  which  were  somewhat 
neglected  by  his  predecessors;  he  built  high  towers  in  tthe 
walls  of  Jerusalem,  which,  as  we  shall  see  in  the  sequel,  were 


CHAPTER    XI,  481 

of  considerable  strength,  The  nature  of  the  engines  based 
upon  mathematical  calculations,  to  throw  arrows  and  large 
stones,  standing  upon  the  towers  and  corners  of  the  walls,  of 
which  the  author  of  Chronicles  speaks  (II  Chron.  xxvi,  15), 
and  which  were  so  much  admired  in  foreign  countries,  is  un- 
known to  us,  and  this  is  the  more  deplorable  since  it  would 
give  us  an  idea  of  the  state  of  science  in  those  days. 

Uziah  was  a  friend  of  agriculture,  which  he  not  only  largely 
patronized,  but  personally  engaged  in.  He  likewise  improved 
the  southern  wilderness  to  pastoral  purposes,  by  digging  numer- 
ous wells  and  defending  the  shepherds  with  garrisons. 

Among  the  officers  of  Uziah  are  mentioned  Jeaiel  the  scribe, 
Maasajah  the  executive  officer,  which  is  most  likely  identical 
with  the  major  domus  mentioned  before,  Hananiah,  the  chief 
captain,  and  Sacheriah  the  wise  man,  identical  with  the  friend 
of  the  king,  at  the  court  of  David.  The  numerous  internal 
improvements  of  Uziah,  and  the  statement  of  Josephus,  that 
Jerobeam  passed  his  life  in  great  happiness,  lead  us  to  suppose 
that  the  wars  did  not  last  for  many  years,  after  which  a  period 
of  rest  and  general  prosperity  was  enjoyed,  and  during  this 
time,  commerce,  arts,  and  agriculture  considerably  improved, 
which  was  productive  of  a  general  opulence,  luxury,  and  cor- 
ruption of  morals,  as  has  ever  been  the  case  among  men. 

Two  prophets,  whose  inspired  words  still  resound  through 
the  civilized  world,  give  us  an  eminent  picture  of  the  opulence, 
luxury  and  corruption  of  morals  of  those  days,  which  they 
opposed  in  fervent  speeches.  We  mean  Amos  and  Hosea. 
Amos  was  a  common  peasant,  as  he  styles  himself  (Amos  vii, 
14)  from  Tekoa,  a  town  in  Judah.  That  bold  man  addressed 
the  people  at  Beth  El,  where  still  a  numerous  concourse  of 
worshipers  had  met ;  his  speeches  were  so  much  feared  by  the 
king's  officers,  that  Amaziah,  the  priest  at  Beth  El,  sent  word 
to  king  Jerobeam,  "Amos  conspires  against  thee  in  the  midst 
of  the  house  of  Israel,  the  land  can  not  bear  all  his  words." 
Upon  hearing  this,  Jerobeam  bade  the  prophet  leave  his  terri- 
tory, which  he  did  with  reluctance.  Two  years  after  this 
31 


482  PERIOD    IV. 

prophet  was  exiled,  a  horrible  earthquake  visited  the  land.* 
To  this  visitation,  Palestine  was  especially  subjected;  but  the 
general  supposition  was,  that  the  misfortune  predicted  by 
Amos,  in  too  general  terms  to  be  applicable  to  any  national 
misfortune,  had  already  overtaken  the  country.  This  may 
have  had  a  salutary  influence  upon  the  state  of  morals.  The 
other  prophet,  coming  probably  shortly  after  Amos,  and  most 
likely  in  the  last  year  of  Jerobeam  II.  Hosea,  was  especially 
severe  on  the  demoralization  of  Israel;  he  complains  of  immo- 
rality, of  superstition  and  injustice.  His  whole  intention 
appears  to  have  been  the  improvement  of  morals  and  religion, 
and  the  reunion  of  Israel  under  the  scepter  of  the  Davidian 
dynasty  {Hosea  iii).  The  peculiarity  of  these  two  prophets 
consists  in  their  imitating  the  style  of  the  Pentateuch,  more  so 
than  any  other  prophet. |  This  shows  us  that  they  had  not 
enjoyed  the  benefits  of  a  liberal  education,  having  collected 
their  knowledge  from  the  popular  books  of  the  nation,  and 
being  gifted  with  a  vehement  eloquence.  This  is  supported  by 
the  statement  of  Amos  himself,  and  by  the  silence  of  the 
historical  sources  on  those  two  prophets,  which  must  naturally 
lead  us  to  suppose  they  did  not  occupy  a  prominent  position 
in  society.  If  this  was  so,  those  two  prophets  are  a  fair 
mirror  to  show  us  the  literary  accomplishments  of  that  age. 
If  two  uneducated  and  little  regarded  men  were  capable  of 
producing,  what  those  two  prophets  really  have  produced,  the 
age  must  have  been  highly  distinguished  for  literary  eminence. 
Opulence  and  luxury  are  always  the  forerunners  and  supporters 
of  great  talents ;  a  flourishing  state  of  agriculture  and  commerce 
among  a  people,  with  a  national  literature,  as  the  Israelites 
had,  must  produce  extraordinary  literati.  The  literary  and 
educational  affairs  of  the  Israelitish  nation  were  certainly 
much  impaired  by  the  century  of  continual  misfortunes.  The 
prophets  of  that  century  were  powerful,  active  men,  but  were 
not  eminently  literary.     No  work  of  that  age  has  reached  us, 

*  Amos  i;  Zechariah  xiv;  5. 
t  See  Appendix  to  this  Period. 


CHAPTER    XI.  483 

with  the  exception  probably  of  a  few  psalms.  But  simultaneously 
with  the  recovery  of  the  nation,  we  also  witness  a  powerful  revi- 
val of  letters.  We  deem  these  observations  necessary  in  order 
to  a  full  understanding  of  that  age,  and  as  a  preliminary  to  what 
follows. 

If  we  may  confide  in  the  statements  of  the  two  prophets, 
just  named,  Jerobeam  II  did  not  only  discontinue  to  act  as  a 
constitutional  king — and  Israel  could  bear  no  other  ruler — but 
his  administration  of  justice  was  very  deficient.*  These  things, 
despite  his  conquests,  made  him  many  enemies  among  the 
nation.  Still,  he  ended  his  days  in  peace,  dying  after  a  reign 
of  forty-one  years  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  Uziah  (773 
b.  a). 

Sechariah,  the  son  of  Jerobeam,  endeavored  to  mount  the 
throne  of  Israel,  but  he  did  not  succeed  in  his  attempt;  for 
after  six  months  he  was  assassinated  by  one  of  his  officers, 
Shallum,  son  of  Jabesh.  This  act  met  with  the  condemnation 
of  the  people,  who  not  only  remembered  gratefully  the  services 
rendered  to  the  country  by  the  Jehu  dynasty,  but  also  the  promise 
given  to  Jehu,  that  his  fourth  generation  should  occupy  the  throne 
of  Israel.  Menahem,  son  of  Gedi,  came  up  from  Thirzah  at  the 
head  of  a  considerable  force;  he  succeeded  in  taking  Samaria, 
and  in  putting  Shallum  to  death.  Menahem  mounted  the  throne 
of  Israel  in  the  thirty-ninth  year  of  Uziah.  Menahem,  of  Thir- 
zah, we  are  informed  by  a  brief  notice  in  II  Kings,  captured 
Thipsah  or  Thapsacus  on  the  Euphrates,  which  formerly  was  the 
most  eastern  city  of  the  Solomonic  empire;  Menahem  prac- 
ticed the  same  cruelties  on  the  city  which  the  prophet  Eli- 
shah  apprehended  that  Hazael  would  commit  in  Israel.  We 
are  not  told,  whether  this  was  done  while  Menahem  was 
king,  or  under  his  predecessor.  Josephus  inclines  to  the 
former  opinion,  admitting,  that  the  campaign  was  rcassumed 
under  Sechariah,  son  of  Jerobeam  II.  This  campaign  must 
have  been  undertaken  either  from  Emesa  or  from  Damascus, 
which  made  it  necessary  that  Palmyra  or  Tadmor  should  be 
occupied  by  Israelitish   troops.     This   shows,  that  Damascus 

*  Amos  ii,  6;    v,  12-14;    Hosea  iv,  1-4. 


484  PERIOD    IV. 

was  in  possession  of  the  Israelites;  for  we  do  not  see  the  pos- 
sibility of  undertaking  such  an  expedition  across  the  Syrian 
desert,  without  being  in  possession  of  Damascus.  Jerobeam  II 
was  wise  enough  not  to  proceed  beyond  the  desert,  but  Secha- 
riah,  either  attracted  by  the  interned  troubles  of  Assyria,  or 
thirsting  for  the  fame  of  having  extended  the  kingdom  to  the 
banks  of  the  Euphrates,  penetrated  the  desert,  sending  his  army 
to  Thipsah.  After  he  was  assassinated,  Menahem  completed  the 
design  by  taking  and  occupying  that  city,  which  brought  him 
in  direct  contact  with  Assyria.  When  Pul  had  secured  himself 
upon  the  throne,  he  naturally  directed  his  attention  across  the 
river,  from  whence  his  predecessors  in  the  royal  office  had 
received  large  sums  of  tribute;  he  threatened  Menahem  with 
an  invasion.  Menahem  not  being  very  secure  on  his  throne 
dreaded  an  invasion;  he,  therefore,  paid  to  Pul  one  thousand 
talents  of  silver,  for  which  Pul  supported  him  on  the  throne  of 
Israel.  The  money  was  collected  in  the  army.  Every  officer 
paid  to  the  king  fifty  shekels,  which  leads  us  to  believe,  that 
Israel  was  under  a  military  despotism,  which  despotism  was 
assisted  by  Assyria  during  the  reign  of  Menahem.  This  idea 
explains  many  of  the  complaints  of  the  prophet  Hosea,  and  the 
denunciation  of  that  inspired  bard  against  the  king  of  Israel, 
and  his  desire  to  reunite  the  nation  under  the  scepter  of  the 
Davidian  dynasty,  then  represented  by  Uziah,  who  governed 
the  nation  in  strict  accordance  with  the  laws  of  Moses.  Mena- 
hem died  after  a  reign  of  ten  years,  and  was  followed  by  his 
son,  Pakahiah,  of  whom  nothing  is  known,  but  that  he  reigned 
two  years.  After  which  Pekah,  son  of  Remaliah,  one  of  the 
officers  of  the  army,  conspired  against  the  king,  assisted  by 
Argob,  Ariah,  and  fifty  men  of  Gilead;  they  entered  the  palace 
at  Samaria,  where  they  slew  the  king.  After  which  Pekah 
mounted  the  throne  of  Israel  (760  b.  c).  The  death  of  five  kings 
in  a  period  of  from  thirteen  to  fourteen  years,  three  of  which 
were  assassinated  by  officers  of  the  army,  who  occupied  the 
throne  of  their  victims,  is  no  mean  evidence  in  support  of  our 
position,  that  from  the  last  days  of  Jerobeam  II,  a  military 
despotism  rose  up  in  Samaria  upon  the  ruins  of  the  laws  and 


CHAPTER    XI.  485 

liberties  enjoyed  so  long  by  the  people  of  Israel.  This*  was  one 
of  the  great  causes  of  the  dissatisfaction  existing  between  the 
party  of  the  prophets  and  the  kings  of  Israel,  whose  bloodshed 
during  this  short  period  is  not  recorded  in  the  historical 
synopsis  of  that  age;  but  which  naturally  must  have  accom- 
panied those  horrid  regicides  which  were  noticed  in  the  inspired 
pages  of  the  prophetical  literature. 

The  principal  cause  of  that  party's  inclination  now  to  the 
Davidian  dynasty,  contrary  to  their  former  policy,  and  their 
desire  to  reunite  Israel  under  the  scepter  of  the  king  of Judah, 
was  the  prosperous  condition  of  Judah  during  the  administra- 
tion of  Uziah  and  his  son  Jotham.  As  a  specimen  of  legal 
exactness  in  Judah,  we  mention  the  fact  of  Uziah's  leprosy, 
and  his  abode  in  a  solitary  place.  King  Uziah  came  in  col- 
lision with  the  priests.  The  author  of  Chronicles  informs  us, 
that  he  encroached  upon  their  official  duties,  burning  incense 
upon  the  altar  of  the  Lord;  but  the  law  was  so  religiously 
regarded,  that  king  was  obliged  to  give  way  to  the  legal 
rights  of  the  priests.  Shortly  after  this  Uziah  was  visited  by 
leprosy,  which  was  the  legal  duty  of  the  priests  to  inspect 
(Levit.  xiii,  2).  Again  we  see  the  king  of  Judah  submitting  to 
the  laws,  although  falling  into  the  hands  of  his  opponents.  The 
priests,  whether  honest  or  dishonest,  declared  the  disease  of 
the  king  to  be  the  real  leprosy,  specified  in  the  Mosaic  code, 
and  the  king,  agreeably  to  the  law,  left  the  city,  taking  up  his 
abode  in  a  retired  residence  without  the  city  walls,  called 
Beth  ha-Haphshith  (house  of  liberty).  Jotham,  the  son  of  the 
king,  and  his  intended  successor,  was  appointed  major  domus. 
This,  however,  must  have  transpired  in  an  advanced  period  of 
his  reign,  for  when  dying,  in  the  fifty-second  year  of  his  reign, 
at  an  age  of  sixty-seven  or  sixty-eight  years,  his  son  Jotham, 
who  succeeded  him,  was  but  twenty-five  years  old. 

In  the  last  year  of  Uziah,  we  hear  the  first  sounds  of  the  royal 
Isaiah  (Isaiah,  vi;  759  b.  c.)  whose  father  Amoz  was  a  brother 
of  king  Amaziah,  as  we  are  informed  by  tradition.  His  first 
vision,  in  which  he  was  sanctified  to  be  a  prophet  of  the  Lord, 
is  grand  and  sublime,  bespeaking  pious  devotion,  lofty  imagina- 


486  PERIOD    IV. 

tion,  powerful  eloquence,  sacred  desire  to  serve  his  nation,  and 
an  intimate  acquaintance  with  Zabian  images.  His  first  vision 
was  directed  against  the  military  despotism  in  Israel,  which 
the  people  unresistingly  bore,  blinded  by  the  splendor  of  the 
court,  and  its  power,  which  extended  to  the  banks  of  the 
Euphrates.  He  foretold  their  ruin  as  a  consequence  of  their 
submission  to  the  government.  King  Jotham  was  a  man  of 
eminent  talents,  and  all  his  endeavors  were  for  the  benefit  of 
the  people ;  he  continued  not  only  the  policy  but  also  main- 
tained the  conquests  of  his  father.  Being  master  of  Edom,  he 
directed  his  operations  towards  Moab  and  Amnion.  It  appears 
that  his  conquests  in  that  land  did  not  go  north  of  the  River 
Arnon,  which  was  the  boundary  of  Israel.  He  received, 
as  the  author  of  Chronicles  informs  us,  an  annual  income 
from  the  country  of  one  hundred  talents  of  silver,  ten  thou- 
sand cor  of  wheat,  and  ten  thousand  cor  of  barley.  This 
heavy  tribute  was  relaxed  after  three  years.  The  conquest 
of  Moab  and  Amnion  was  most  important,  because  it  gave 
to  Judah  the  desert  as  a  frontier  in  the  east  against  the  grow- 
ing power  of  the  Assyrians,  and  secured  to  them  the  advantage 
of  an  uninterrupted  trade  with  Arabia,  which  appears  to  have 
been  the  principal  object  in  view. 

Jotham  did  not  neglect  internal  improvements.  He  fortified 
many  cities  of  Judah.  He  also,  as  Josephus  informs  us,  took 
care  of  the  foundations  and  cloisters  of  the  temple,  and  repaired 
the  walls,  that  were  fallen  down,  and  built  very  great  towers, 
and  such  as  were  almost  impregnable,  applying  thus  the 
wealth  of  the  country  to  its  defence.  Jotham  was  a  very  pious 
man,  but  he  did  not  visit  the  temple.  This  neglect  of  his 
throws  light  upon  the  rupture  between  the  royal  family  and 
the  priesthood,  noticed  before.  The  prophets  and  the  priests 
were  never  on  friendly  terms.  The  influence  of  the  former 
upon  the  policy  of  Uziah  and  Jotham  shows  that  the  in- 
fluence of  the  priests  was  remarkably  limited.  The  prophets 
themselves  appear  at  that  time  to  have  been  differing  in  senti- 
ment; one  part  of  them  supporting  the  throne  of  Judah  and 
opposing  the  military  despotism  of  Israel,  while  another  por- 


CHAPTER     XI.  487 

tion  stigmatized  by  the  former  as  false  prophets,  adhered  to 
Israel,  still  hoping  to  revolutionize  the  kingdom,  and  to  restore 
the  ancient  policy.  This  led  the  former  to  despair,  and  to 
cling  to  the  throne.  This  conflict  in  the  great  party  of  the 
prophets  is  thought  to  have  been  one  of  the  causes  of  the  fall  of 
Israel. 

Jotham's  administration  was  every  way  beneficial  to  the 
people;  but  he  could  not  prevent  the  consequences  of  an 
extended  commerce  and  increase  of  wealth.  There  was  a 
luxury  in  Jerusalem  at  that  time  which  baffles  description. 
The  prophet  Isaiah,  a  few  years  after  this,  declares  that  the 
land  was  full  of  silver  and  gold,  that  their  treasures  were 
immense  (chap,  ii),  and  also  (chap,  iii)  enumerates  no 
less  than  twenty-six  different  articles  of  luxury  of  the 
daughters  of  Zion.  Besides  this  we  <are  informed  by  our 
author,  of  the  numerous  horses  and  chariots,  which  were 
employed  for  private  use ;  and  of  the  concourse  of  foreigners 
from  the  east  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  in  which  foreign  man- 
ners and  customs  prevailed.  That  this  state  of  things  was  a 
cause  of  demoralization  in  the  capital  can  not  be  doubted. 
Jotham  could  only  arrest  that  element.  He  could  not  destroy 
it,  if  he  did  not  first  deprive  them  of  the  wealth  and  commerce 
which  was  the  main  spring  of  it;  and  this  was  neither  in  his 
power,  nor  was  it  to  the  interest  of  the  nation.  He  died  in  the 
sixteenth  year  of  his  reign  (743  b.  c),  and  was  succeeded  by 
his  son  Ahaz,  in  the  seventeenth  year  of  Pekah  king  of  Israel. 

Ahaz  was  but  twenty  years  old  when  he  mounted  the  throne 
of  his  father,  and  was  educated  under  the  influences  described 
before.  He  therefore  excelled  all  his  predecessors  in  profligacy, 
and  licentiousness.  Idolatry  was  again  imposed  upon  the  land, 
in  which  the  king  went  so  far  as  to  lead  his  son  through  the 
fire  in  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  where  Moloch  was  worshiped. 
The  heights  around  Jerusalem  were  dedicated  to  the  gods  of 
the  different  nations,  and  upon  these  the  king  himself  sacrificed 
and  burned  incense.  The  law  was  suspended,  despotism  and 
corruption  had  gained  the  ascendancy;  and  the  affections  of 
the  people  were  lost.     In  all  this,   the  king  was  supported  by 


488  PERIOD  IV. 

the  citizens  of  Jerusalem,  and  most  likely  by  those  of  other 
large  cities,  where  commerce  flourished. 

If  we  consider,  that  hostile  operations  between  Israel  and 
Syria  had  begun  at  the  close  of  Jotham's  reign,  we  shall  see 
that  the  young  king  had  political  motives  for  his  idolatry. 
Being  aware  that  the  kings  of  Assyria  supported  Israel  and 
Syria,  Jotham  endeavored  to  break  up  that  dangerous  alliance, 
for  which  purpose  he  adopted  the  Assyrian  idolatry.  This 
rendered  him  more  agreeable  to  that  monarchy ;  and  he  succeed- 
ed in  securing  the  friendship  of  Tiglath  Pileser,  the  king. 
The  prophet  Isaiah  loudly  protested  against  such  a  state  of  cor- 
ruption. His  beautiful  speech,  from  the  second  to  the  end  of 
his  fifth  chapter,  is  a  mirror  of  the  age.  He  pronounced  a 
stern  judgment,  which  the  Lord  fulfilled  on  Judah  and  Zion  in 
a  few  years.  He  complained  of  the  insatiate  avarice  of  the 
rich,  of  the  extensive  pursuit  of  pleasure,  of  the  evil  and 
wicked  practices,  of  the  perversion  of  truth  and  of  the  want 
of  justice.  He  saw  the  rise  of  the  Assyrian  power,  he  knew 
the  spirit  of  conquest  which  animated  it,  and  so  he  predicted 
the  ruin  of  Judah  by  that  new  friend.  But  he  complained 
in  vain.  The  policy  of  Ahaz  was  not  changed,  and  the  mis- 
fortune increased  from  day  to  day. 

Pekah,  king  of  Israel,  and  Rezin,  king  of  Damascus — Samaria 
and  Damascus  were  again  two  kingdoms — commenced  active 
hostilities,  probably  about  the  second  or  third  year  of  Ahaz.  The 
objects  were  to  conquer  Judah  and  its  dependencies,  and  to 
make  Ben  Tabol  viceroy  of  Judah.  Rezin,  with  his  army, 
marched  by  way  of  Edom  through  Phelistia  to  Jerusalem,  while 
Pekah  came  from  the  north  with  his  army,  to  meet  Rezin 
before  the  walls  of  Jerusalem.  The  disaffected  subjects  of 
Ahaz  made  common  cause  with  the  enemy  (Isaiah  viii,  6);  and 
so  Rezin  succeeded  in  revolutionizing  Edom  and  Phelistia.  He 
wrested  the  costly  Elath  from  Judah — whose  citizens  he  ex- 
pelled— leaving  the  place  open  to  Syrians  and  Idumeans  only. 
The  garrisons  of  Judah  were  beaten  at  all  points,  and  the 
united  armies  of  Rezin,  with  the  Idumians  andPhelistines,  now 
came  from  the  south-west  and  west  towards  Jerusalem,   re- 


CHAPTER  XI.  489 

ducing  one  fortified  city  after  another.  Beth  Shemcsh,  Aialon, 
Gederoth  and  Sochu,  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy.  Tisnah, 
too,  and  Gamsu,  surrendered,  so  that  all  the  land  east  of  the 
mountains  of  Judah  was  subject  to  the  control  of  the  enemy. 
The  people  every  where  made  common  cause  with  the  invaders, 
and  great  was  the  panic  in  Jerusalem.  Meanwhile  Ahaz  was 
so  beaten  in  the  north  by  Pekah  that  he  lost  one  hundred  and 
twenty  thousand  men,  and  but  a  small  force  was  left  to  protect 
Jerusalem.  The  treatment  of  the  prisoners  made  in  Judah,  by 
the  advice  of  the  prophet  Obed,  was  friendly,  giving  them 
presents,  and  sending  them  back  to  Jericho.  This  won  over 
the  rest  of  the  people  to  the  king  of  Israel.  Thus  the  two 
armies  could  proceed  almost  without  resistance  to  Jerusalem. 
Dismay  and  terror  spread  over  the  city;  for  its  fall  was  inevita- 
ble. Again  the  prophet  Isaiah  admonished  the  king  to  abolish 
the  policy,  which  estranged  from  him  the  hearts  of  the  nation; 
advising  him  to  throw  himself  into  the  arms  of  his  people, 
who  would  rise  as  one  man  in  favor  of  the  son  of  David,  and 
rescue  the  land  from  the  hands  of  the  invader;  again  he  cau- 
tioned him  against  the  entangling  alliance  with  Assyria,  which 
would  result  in  the  greatest  misfortunes  to  the  country.  He 
was  statesman  enough  to  forsec  the  consequences  if  the  only 
barrier  of  Judah  against  Assyria,  Israel  and  Syria,  should 
be  removed;  he  was  aware  of  the  horrid  consequences  of  a 
similar  alliance  with  Syria  against  Israel  by  Asa.  But  the 
advice  of  Isaiah  was  not  followed,  the  king  maintained  his 
obnoxious  policy,  and  acted  as  once  his  predecessor,  Asa,  had 
done.  He  sent  large  presents  to  Tiglath  Pileser,  king  of  Assy- 
ria, urging  him  to  the  most  abominable  treachery  against  Israel 
and  Syria,  whose  armies  were  concentrated  in  Judah  and  its 
dependencies,  with  no  defence  on  the  eastern  frontiers.  Tiglath 
Pileser  surprised  Syria  and  took  Damascus,  without  much 
resistance.  Ilezin,  who  hastened  back  to  Damascus,  was  taken 
and  killed.  From  Damascus  the  Assyrians  marched  to  the  west, 
and  one  city  after  another  fell  into  their  hands.  They  finally 
succeeded  in  crossing  the  Bashan  Mountains.  Iyon,  Abel-beth- 
Maacha,  Janoah,   Kadesh,  Hazor,   together  with  the  province 


493  PERIOD    IV. 

beyond  Jordan  and  Galilee,  were  taken.  Many  of  the  people 
of  Damascus  were  transported  to  the  province  of  Kir,  a  part  of 
Albania  and  Media,  and  to  this  part  of  Assyria  probably  the 
chief  men  of  the  towns  taken  from  Israel,  were  transported. 
But  according  to  I  Chronicles  v,  20,  they  were  brought  to  the 
interior  of  Assyria.  While  the  Assyrian  army  desolated  the 
country  and  exiled  its  inhabitants,  a  conspiracy  broke  out  in 
the  palace  at  Samaria,  and  Pekah  was  assassinated  by  Hosea, 
son  of  Eli,  having  reigned  about  twenty  years.  This  was  in 
the  fourth  year  of  Ahaz  (740  b.  c). 

An  interregnum  of  ten  years  occurred,  during  which  time 
the  form  of  government  is  uncertain.  Hosea  was  viceroy 
over  the  country  for  those  ten  years,  under  the  protection  of 
Assyria.  Meanwhile  the  land  of  Judah  and  its  dependencies 
being  evacuated  by  the  foreign  troops,  Ahaz  easily  succeeded 
in  regaining  his  former  dominion,  save  in  Phelistia,  where  he 
met  with  no  success.  Edom  was  retaken,  as  thie  victorious 
song  of  Abadiah  testifies;  and  the  song  of  victory  of  Isaiah 
(xv,  xvi)  clearly  shows  that  Moab  was  retaken  with  little 
trouble.  While  now  Isaiah  mourned  at  home  over  the  fall  of 
Damascus  and  Israel  (xvii,  xviii),  Ahaz  proceeded  to  Damas- 
cus to  pay  his  respects  to  Tiglath  Pileser,  who  had  his  head- 
quarters in  that  ancient  city.  We  know  not  what  promises 
were  made  between  these  two  potentates,  save  that  Ahaz 
promised  a  heavy  tribute  to  his  fearful  patron.  While  in  Da- 
mascus, Ahaz  sent  a  pattern  of  an  altar  seen  there  to  the  high 
priest  Uziah,  according  to  which  an  altar  was  made  in  Jerusa- 
lem before  the  return  of  Ahaz  from  Damascus.  This  leads  us 
to  believe,  that  he'stayed  there  much  longer  than  an  ordinary 
visit  required,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  he  assisted  the 
Assyrian  king  in  his  operations  against  Israel.  The  new  altar 
was  placed  in  the  temple  with  the  consent  of  the  high  priest. 
It  was  probably  done  reluctantly,  for  Isaiah  mentions  him  as 
among  the  faithful  witnesses.  But  the  object  of  the  king  in 
erecting  the  new  altar,  and  in  all  the  subsequent  alterations 
made  in  the  temple,  was  by  no  means  a  religious  one.  It  was 
done  to  please  the  king  of  Assyria,  whose  vassal  he  was  (II 


CHAPTER    XI.  491 

Kings  xvi,  18).  We  therefore  agree  with  Josephus,  and  the 
author  of  Chronicles,  that  Aliaz  continued  a  vassal  to  Assyria 
and  to  identify  the  people  of  Judah  with  the  Ass)rrians. 

All  hopes  of  restoration  were  now  concentrated" in  the  young 
prince  Hezekiah  (Isaiah  ix,  5,  6).  The  nation  still  felt  its 
native  buoyancy,  and  the  prophets  spoke  the  voice  of  the  peo- 
ple. They  saw  the  fearful  growth  of  Assyria,  against  which 
no  defence  could  avail  hut  the  unity  and  vigor  of  the  nation. 
But  Ahaz  had  prostrated  their  liberties  and  would  also  have 
destroyed  their  religion,  so  they  did  not  take  arms  when 
the  invaders  came.  Ahaz  again  knew  well  enough,  that  he 
was  forsaken  by  his  people,  and  he  threw  himself  altogether 
into  the  arms  of  Assyria.  Happily,  that  quarrel  between  the 
king  and  his  people  terminated  with  the  early  death  of  Ahaz 
in  the  thirty-sixth  year  of  his  age,  in  the  sixteenth  year  of  his 
administration.  His  youthful  son,  Hezekiah,  mounted  the 
throne  (627  b.  c). 

He  was  twenty-five  years  old  at  this  time,  which  would 
indicate  that  his  father  was  but  ten  or  eleven  years  old  when 
he  was  born.  This,  however,  seems  impossible,  and  we  are 
obliged  either  to  diminish  the  age  of  Hezekiah,  or  to  suppose 
that  he  was  a  son  of  Jotham.  The  latter  appears  most  likely. 
The  influence  of  Isaiah  upon  the  policy  of  Hezekiah  is  con- 
spicuous. The  whole  government  was  reformed;  the  officers 
of  the  former  king,  among  whom  was  the  major  domus,  Shabna, 
were  replaced  by  men  of  independence.  The  law  of  Moses  was 
restored,  the  altars  of  the  high  places  were  abolished,  in  favor 
of  synagogues  without  sacrifices,  which  continued  ever  after. 
All  the  idols,  temples,  altars,  groves,  or  pillars  erected  to  a 
god,  were  destroyed;  the  serpent  of  brass  once  made  by  Moses 
shared  the  same  fate,  because  of  having  been  recently  wor- 
shiped. All  the  alterations  which  Ahaz  had  made  in  the 
temple  were  abolished,  the  ancient  forms  restored,  the  priests 
and  Levites  reorganized,  song  and  music  restored  to  the  temple 
in  the  ancient  style,  and  every  trace  of  Ahaz's  administration 
was  blotted  out  of  existence. 

The   prophets   had   achieved   a    signal   victory,  the  people 


492  PERIOD    IV. 

rejoiced,  spirit  and  courage  came  with  the  return  of  liberty, 
and  the  time  for  action  had  arrived.  Hezekiah,  therefore, 
invaded  Phelistia,  and  succeeded  in  subjecting  her  again  to  the 
scepter  of  Judah;  and  again  we  see  Judah  risen  to  prosperity 
by  her  own  means.  The  sea  shores  were  recaptured,  the  road 
to  Egypt  was  no  longer  made  dangerous  by  Phelistine  cruisers, 
and  commerce  once  more  gave  all  the  advantages  which  could 
be  wished.  The  next  step  of  Hezekiah  was  by  refusing  tribute, 
to  declare  his  country  independent  of  Assyria.  This,  certainly, 
was  a  hazardous  step;  but  the  will  of  the  people,  and  other 
circumstances,  emboldened  Hezekiah.  It  was,  indeed,  not  the 
whole  people  who  wished  for  their  independence  from  Assyria, 
for  the  commercial  interests  of  the  country  must  have  suffered 
greatly  by  it.  But  the  party  of  the  prophets  was  in  power, 
and  they  knew  of  no  interests  superior  to  liberty  and  inde- 
pendence, especially  of  the  Assyrian  gods. 

We  leave  Judah  with  a  great  deal  of  satisfaction,  for  it  was 
in  a  prosperous  condition,  and  return  to  the  land  of  Israel. 
Little  remained  of  the  land,  the  best  part  of  it  had  fallen  into 
the  hands  of  Assyria,  and  that  little  was  governed  by  Hoseah, 
son  of  Elah,  who  was  but  viceroy  of  the  Assyrian  power.  But 
Hoseah  secretly  endeavored  to  gather  strength  to  a  revolt 
against  his  Assyrian  master.  To  this  he  was  secretly  encou- 
raged by  the  party  of  the  prophets.  The  people  of  Samaria, 
alone,  had  maintained  the  shadow  of  independence;  but  they 
were  divided  in  opinion.  Some  desired  an  alliance  with 
Egypt,  while  others,  as  in  Judah,  were  friends  of  Assyria, 
probably  for  commercial  reasons.  The  party  of  the  prophets 
were  opposed  to  both.  They  could  wish  only  for  a  restoration 
of  the  laws  of  Moses,  the  ancient  liberties,  rights  and  reli- 
gion, thus  to  satisfy  the  people,  and  sought  therefore  to  inspire 
them  to  a  general  insurrection,  which  was  the  only  plan  pro- 
mising success,  and  a  regeneration  of  the  people.  But  it  is 
only  the  free  man,  who  is  able  to  appreciate  the  power  of  a 
people  rising  to  regain  its  liberty  and  independence.  Hoseah 
had  no  confidence  in  the  spirit  of  the  multitude ;  he  could  not 
have  such  a  confidence,  for  he  had  grown  up  under  a  military 


CHAPTER   XI.  493 

despotism,  and  was  now  himself  the  servant  of  a  despot.  He 
put  his  confidence  in  Egypt,  where  the  Assyrian  appetite  for 
conquest  was  much  dreaded,  and  which  had,  with  hut  little 
exception,  stood  in  friendly  relations  to  Israel  ever  since  the 
days  of  Moses.  After  an  alliance  with  Egypt  had  heen  se- 
cured, Hoseah  declared  his  country  independent  of  Assyria, 
and  proclaimed  himself  king  of  Israel,  three  years  previous  to  the 
time  when  Hezekiah  mounted  the  throne  of  Judah.  It  is  re- 
markable, that  the  Assyrians  took  no  notice  of  Hezekiah's  step 
till  seven  years  after  this,  and  in  Judah  not  before  the  four- 
teenth year  of  Hezekiah.  These  facts  deserve  particular 
investigation. 

The  death  of  Tiglath-Pileser  and  the  ascent  of  Salmancssar, 
or  the  Enemessar  of  the  book  of  Tobit,  to  the  Assyrian  throne, 
is  set  by  the  best  authorities  730,  b.  c,  or  729,  b.  c.  Mr. 
Benomi  adopts  the  latter  date,  which  was  the  same  year  when 
Hoseah  proclaimed  himself  king  of  Israel,  if  we  reckon  that 
he  reigned  eight  years,  and  was  captured  by  the  Assyrian  king 
in  the  ninth  year  of  his  reign,  about  720,  b.  c,  or  721,  b.  c. 
The  change  of  sovereigns  is  an  event  of  considerable  import- 
ance even  in  the  best  organized  monarchies,  bringing  about  not 
seldom  a  change  of  policy.  This  is  especially  the  case  in 
large  empires  founded  by  the  sword.  The  hopes  of  Israel  and 
Judah  were  directed  to  this  moment  (Isaiah  xxxi,  8);  Hoseah 
improved  the  chance,  and  Hezekiah  soon  followed  his  example. 
Tyre  also  refused  to  pay  tribute  to  Assyria,  and  Egypt,  under 
Ethiopian  kings,  also  revolted  against  Assyria.  Setho  or 
Sebaco  II,  formerly  a  priest  of  Vulcan,  the  So  of  Scripture, 
improved  the  chance  to  seize  the  throne  of  Egypt,  and  the 
king  of  Ethiopia,  expecting  an  invasion  from  Assyria,  declared 
his  independence.  He  entered  into  an  alliance  with  Hoseah, 
while  Hezekiah  entered  into  no  alliance,  well  knowing,  as 
Isaiah  or  Hezekiah  did,  that  it  would  be  the  policy  of  the 
Ethiopian  king  to  assist  in  the  defence  of  the  territory  of 
Judah,  as  the  barrier  of  Ethiopia  against  Assyria,  while  an 
alliance  with  the  then  distracted  Egypt  (Isaiah  xix,),  was  con- 
sidered of  no  avail.     It   was  therefore   Israel,  Judah,   Tyre, 


494  PERIOD    IV. 

Egypt,  and  Ethiopia,  against  Assyria;  and  as  Salmanessar  had 
just  ascended  the  throne,  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  act  before 
the  internal  affairs  of  the  nation  were  reduced  to  order. 
This  took  him  six  years,  and  then  we  find  him  advancing 
against  Israel,  which  had  to  be  subjected  before  he  could 
proceed  against  Tyre,  Judah  or  Egypt.  In  the  sixth  year  of 
Hoseah,  therefore,  Salmanessar  invaded  Samaria  with  a  large 
force.  The  people  of  Israel  nobly  contended  for  their  inde- 
pendence. They  were  not  united,  but  still  the  colossal  army 
of  Assyria  did*ot  succeed  in  reducing  the  small  country  in  a 
short  timc;  it  took  them  three  years  to  subdue  the  remainder 
of  Israel.  Not  till  they  had  fought  for  every  inch  of  land  around 
the  city  of  Samaria,  and  after  that  city  was  so  long  blockaded, 
that  famine  and  its  horrid  consequences  resulted,  was  the  city 
surrendered.  And  it  appears  to  have  been  conditionally  even 
then,  for  we  read  only  of  transportations;  no  mention  is  made 
of  a  slaughter,  which  might  be  expected  from  an  invader  of  a 
revolting  province  after  a  campaign  of  three  years.  The  pa- 
triots and  the  friends  of  the  Egyptian  league,  which  had  proved 
useless,  as  the  prophets  had  predicted,  were  transported  to 
Halah  and  Habar,  two  cities  by  the  river  of  Gozan,  and  into 
the  cities  of  the  Medes.  Al  Habor,  still  maintaining  its  ancient 
name,  on  the  left  bank  of  the  Euphrates,  two  hundred  and 
fifty  miles  west  of  Baghdad,  the  name  of  which  is  extended  to 
the  district  stretching  for  miles  along  the  banks  of  the  river 
Hermas  or  Al  Habor.  Halah  is  the  name  of  another  river  and 
district  about  fifty  miles  from  Karkasiah,  flowing  into  the 
former  river  at  Naharaim,  on  the  banks  of  which  rivers, 
formerly  called  river  of  Gozan,  the  towns  of  Halah  and  Habor 
must  have  been  located. 

This  transportation  appears  to  have  been  a  matter  of  neces- 
sity, for  Salmanessar  could  not  safely  advance  towards  Tyre  as 
long  as  that  dangerous  people  were  left  in  his  rear,  whose  valor 
he  had  tested  in  a  desperate  contest  of  three  years'  duration, 
wherefore  he  transported  the  king  and  his  party  together  with 
all  the  patriots  to  distant  cities,  where  he  expected  to  see  them 
naturalize  among  the  Assyrian  subjects. 


chapter,   xi.  495 

So  Samaria  fell  (721,  b.  c),  crushed  under  the  heavy  weight 
of  the  Assyrian  giant,  who  had  stepped  forth  to  make  large 
conquests,  to  make  nations  obey  his  arbitrary  commands.  It 
maintained  itself  for  the  length  of  two  centuries  and  a  half, 
experiencing  all  the  different  whims  of  fortune ;  it  was  power- 
ful and  prosperous  at  one  time,  feeble  and  insignificant  at  an 
other;  but  it  was  always  free  and  attached  to  the  laws  of 
Moses.  Its  tyrants  did  not  succeed,  they  were  held  in  proper 
limits  by  the  men  of  the  people.  The  following  sins  were 
committed  on  that  nation.  First,  the  obstinate  protest  of 
Judah  against  the  majority  of  the  national  conncil,  which 
forced  the  kings  of  Israel  to  a  schism  in  religion  productive  of 
considerable  opposition  in  the  nation.  Second,  the  treacherous 
act  of  Asa  having  caused  the  king  of  Syria  to  betray  Israel, 
taking  by  surprise  the  natural  barriers  of  that  country,  which 
was  the  cause  of  a  century  of  successive  misfortunes.  Third, 
the  same  horrid  Crime  was  committed  on  the  nation  by  Ahaz, 
rousing  from  his  den  the  Assyrian  lion  so  greedy  for  prey. 
Fourth,  the  importation  of  foreign  worship  by  Ahab,  and  the 
assassination  of  that  king,  which  demoralized  many  and  em- 
bittered the  parties  towards  each  other.  Fifth,  the  military 
despotism,  which  is  conspicuous  from  the  last  days  of  Jero- 
beam  II,  to  which  the  above  mentioned  difficulties  most  likely 
gave  birth — to  the  fall  of  Galilee  and  the  provinces  beyond 
Jordan.  Samaria  fell  by  natural  and  conceivable  causes, 
through  which  the  design  of  providence  is  revealed.  Many  of 
her  people  were  transported  to  the  east,  as  mentioned  before, 
from  which  point  they  emigrated  in  the  following  ages,  as  far 
east  as  China,  and  as  far  south  as  India.  Others  emigrated  to 
Egypt,  Nubia  and  Abyssinia,  and  from  thence  to  the  interior  of 
Africa,  on  the  coasts  of  which  they  most  likely  found  Hebrew 
and  Phoenician  settlements.  Others  sought  refuge  in  Phoenicia, 
from  whence  many  emigrated  in  an  early  age  to  the  Caucassian 
mountains,  and  most  likely  also  to  Greece  and  the  Ionian 
islands,  as  well  as  to  the  northern  coast  of  Africa,  to  which, 
however,  they  may  have  come  by  the  way  of  Egypt.  Many 
who  were  inclined  to  idolatrous  practices  easily  amalgamated 


496  PERIOD  IV. 

with  the  nations  among  which  they  came;  but  the  greatest 
number  of  them,  addicted  to  the  laws  of  Moses,  remained  a 
distinct  people  wherever  they  found  a  home. 

The  impressions  which  the  fall  of  Israel  made  in  Judah,  and 
the  consequent  preparations  of  war  in  the  expectation  of  an 
Assyrian  invasion,  we  shall  describe  in  the  next  period,  con- 
cluding this  with  the  soothing  words  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah, 
"  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  A  voice  was  heard  in  Ramah,  lamenta- 
tion, bitter  weeping;  Rachel  weeping  for  her  children,  refuseth 
to  be  comforted  for  her  children,  because  they  were  not.  Thus 
saith  the  Lord,  Refrain  thy  voice  from  weeping,  and  thine  eyes 
from  tears,  for  thy  work  shall  be  rewarded,  saith  the  Lord, 
and  they  shall  come  again  from  the  land  of  the  enemy;  and 
there  is  hope  to  thy  future,  saith  the  Lord,  that  thy  children 
shall  come  again  to  their  own  border.  I  have  surely  heard 
Ephraim  bemoaning  himself  thus:  Thou  hast  chastised  me, 
and  I  was  chastised  as  a  calf  unaccustomed  to  the  yoke ;  turn 
thou  me,  and  I  shall  be  turned;  for  thou  art  the  Lord  my  God; 
surely  after  that  I  had  been  turned,  I  repented,  and  after  I  had 
been  befriended  again  I  stroke  upon  my  thigh;  I  was  ashamed, 
yea,  even  confounded,  because  I  did  bear  the  reproach  of  my 
youth.  Is  not  Ephraim  my  dear  son?  is  he  not  a  pleasant 
child?  for  while  I  speak  of  him,  I  do  earnestly  remember  him 
still;  therefore  my  bowels  are  troubled  for  him,  I  will  surely 
have  mercy  upon  him,  saith  the  Lord  "  (xxxi,  15-20). 


APPENDIX    TO    PERIOD    IV.  497 


APPENDIX   TO   PERIOD  IT 


I.  THE  PEOPLE  AND  THE  COUNTRY. 

The  land  of  Israel  was  not,  during  this  period,  the  only  field 
over  which  the  industry  of  that  nation  extended ;  the  land  of 
Amnion,  Moab  and  the  Phelistines,  Arabia  Petrsea,  and 
Ccelo-Syria,  were  subjected  to  agricultural  and  pastural  pur- 
poses. The  prophets  describe,  not  only  the  fertility  of  the 
plains  and  valleys,  but  also,  the  olives  and  the  vines  of  Car- 
mel,  Tabor,  Bashan,  and  other  mountainous  or  hilly  sections 
of  the  country,  which  were  subjected  to  the  hands  of  the 
agriculturists.  The  numerous  terraces  on  the  mountains,  the 
caves  in  Mount  Carmel,  which  were  wine  cellars,  and  the  nume- 
ous  canals  conducting  water  to  dry  places,  which  modern 
travelers  describe,  are  unquestionable  tokens  of  a  high  state 
of  culture:  having  once  been  common  in  Palestine.  In  the 
fifth  chapter  of  Isaiah  we  are  informed,  that  stone  fences  were 
built  around  the  vineyards,  that  the  stones  were  moved  from 
the  field  to  improve  its  fertility,  that  wine  presses  and  towers 
were  built  in  the  vineyards. 

It  appears,  that  every  piece  of  land  was  made  subservient  to 
the  support  of  animal  life;  and  the  wilderness,  itself,  was 
much  more  cultivated  and  inhabited  than  is  usually  imagined; 
and  this  was  the  case  especially  during  and  after  the  reign  of 
Uziah. 

No  mention  is  made  in  our  sources  of  any  export  of  vegeta- 
bles during  this  period;  this  was  prevented  by  the  crowded 
population  of  the  country.  We  are  informed  that  the  viceroy 
of  Moab  paid  to  Ahab,  an  annual  tribute  of  live  stock.  No 
mention  is  made  of  the  manufacturing  of  articles  used  in  the 
country.  Still  we  are  informed  of  an  immense  wealth  in  both 
32 


498  APPENDIX    TO 

kingdoms,  and  of  an  unusual  luxury.     We  do  not  see  how  those 
historians   can   account  for  this  fact,  who  deny  that   an  exten- 
sive commerce  was   carried  on  in  Palestine.     It   is   admitted, 
that  Solomon  laid  the  foundation  for  a  large  commerce ;  but  it 
is    alleged,     that   it     vanished   with    the    death    of  Solomon. 
Besides  the  wealth  and  luxury  of  Palestine,  the  following  facts 
also   speak  against   this  hypothesis.     Judah   was   continually, 
up  to  the  reign  of  Jehoram,  son  of  Jehoshaphat,  in  possession 
of  Edom  and   its  harbors,   and  of  Phelistia   and  its   harbors. 
Those  ports  were  retaken  by  Amaziah,   after  they  had  been 
fifty   to    sixty  years    in   the   hands   of  the    Syrians.     Elath 
also  was  retaken  by  Uziah,  who  built  a  city  upon  the  Red  Sea.* 
Why  were  they  so  eager  to  possess  the  ports  of  Edom,  if  it 
was  not  for  commercial  purposes  ?  And  why  should  Uziah  have 
built  a  city  in  the  desert  on  the  Red  Sea,  and  fortified  it,  if  it 
was  not  for  the  purpose   of  having  a  port  on  that  sea  in  case 
Elath  and  Eziongaber  should  be  lost?    It  is  not  certain  that 
the  way  of  the  plain  and  Eziongaber  were   ever  lost;  for  we 
only  read  of  the   capture  of  Petra  and  Elath,  while  Ezion- 
gaber would  certainly  have  been  noticed,  had  it  been  lost  or 
retaken.     Besides  this,  it  must  be  remarked  that  Ammon  and 
Moab  were  in  possession  of  Israel  till  after  the  death  of  Ahab. 
Israel  held  the  sea  shores  from  Mount  Carmel  bay  to  Joppa. 
Uziah   brought  Ammon    and   Moab    again  [into  the  hands  of 
Judah,  so  that  it  is  evident,   that  Judah   and  Israel   were  not 
only  in  possession  of  important  seaports,  but  they  were  also  in 
immediate  connection  with  Egypt,  Arabia,  Phoenicia  and  Syria. 
The  land  trade  between   Egypt  and  Syria  could    pass    only 
through  Judah.     We  can  not   imagine  for  a   moment,    that  so 
intelligent  a  nation  as  the   Israelites  were,   should  not  have 
made  use  of  those  important  commercial   advantages,   or  that 
they  should  have   learned  nothing  of  their  neighbors  in  com- 
mercial relations,  of  whom  they  frequently  learned  idolatrous 
practices. 

Next  must  be   considered  the  accurate  knowledge  which  the 
prophets  possessed  of  the  state  of  affairs  in  foreign  countries. 

*  Joseph.  Antiq.  b.  ix,  c.  xi,  3. 


PERIOD    IV.  499 

They  spoke  of  Egypt,  Ethiopia,  Arabia,  Assyria,  Babylonia, 
Media,  Syria  and  Phoenicia  with  a  degree  of  certainty,  and 
exercised  so  marked  an  influence  upon  foreign  countries,  that 
we  easily  discover  their  accurate  knowledge  of  the  political, 
commercial,  moral  and  rcligous  affairs  of  those  countries.  If 
it  is  admitted  that  knowledge  must  be  acquired,  that  the 
prophets  did  not  make  pleasure  trips  through  all  those  coun- 
tries, and  that  scientific  expeditions  were  then  unusual,  it 
must  also  be  admitted  that  the  Israelites  held  a  close  inter- 
course with  all  those  nations.  We  could  here  enter  upon  the 
fact,  that  Israelitish  traditions,  doctrines,  laws,  and  a  multi- 
tude of  words,  were  met  among  the  ancient  Goths  and  Celts, 
which  would  prove,  that  the  Israelites  must  have  had  a  large 
share  in  the  Phoenician  trade  of  Europe;  but  this  requires 
more  space  than  our  limits  allow.  We  return  now  to  the 
direct  testimony  to  this  effect. 

There  is  first  of  all  the  important  passage,  I  Kings,  xxii,  49, 
50,  which  has  been  so  often  misunderstood.  Literally  rendered 
that  passage  reads,  "Jehoshaphat  decimated  (pvo)  the  ships  of 
Tarshish  (or  designated  to  go  to  Tarshish)  and  fitted  them 
out  (np)  to  go  to  Ophir  for  gold,  and  he  did  not  go;  for  ships 
were  wrecked  at  Eziongebar.  Then  Ahaziah  the  son  of  Ahab 
said  to  Jehoshaphat,  '  Let  my  servants  go  with  thy  servants 
in  ships,  but  Jehoshaphat  refused.'  If  he  took  but  every 
tenth  vessel  of  those  which  run  to  Tarshish  to  fit  them  out  for 
an  Ophir  expedition,  he  must  have  had  a  considerable  fleet. 
We  see  in  this  passage  only  that  the  Ophir  trade  was  inter- 
rupted ;  which  confirms  the  fact  on  the  other  side,  that  an  active 
Tarshish  trade  was  carried  on  in  the  time  of  that  king.  Some 
misled  by  II  Chronicles  xx,  35-37,  supposed  that  the  ships  of 
Jehoshaphat  did  not  go  to  Tarshish  any  more,  while  the  passage 
in  Kings  expressly  speaks  of  not  going  to  Ophir,  with  which 
expedition  Ahaziah  had  nothing  to  do.  That  joint  undertaking 
is  next  proposed,  which  the  author  of  Chronicles  informs  us 
was  intended  to  go  to  Tarshish.  But  since  some  of  the  ships 
were  wrecked,  the  misfortune  was  ascribed  to  the  wickedness 
of  a  joint  undertaking  with  Ahaziah,  so  that  Jehoshaphat   was 


500 


APPENDIX    TO 


obliged  to  give  up  that  plan  before  any  of  the  ships  were  built. 
Jehoshaphat  having  lost  some  ships,  and  seeing  his  plan,  to 
fill  up  the  number  of  Tarshish  vessels,  in  company  of  Ahaziah, 
suddenly  frustrated,  could  not  send  ships  to  Ophir,  because  he 
needed  them,  for  the  more  important  Tarshish  trade.  This  is 
literally  stated  in  those  twopasssages,  and  is  no  mean  evidence 
of  an  active  Tarshish  trade  up  to  the  days  of  Jehoshaphat.  Next 
must  be  considered  that  the  prophet  Isaiah  mentions  the  ships 
of  Tarshish  among  the  excellent  things  of  Judah's  pride  (Isaiah 
ii,  1G),  which  he  also  mentions  in  connection  with  Tyre, 
(xxiii  1,  6,  10,  14),  as  also  Ezekiel  did  (xxvii  12,  25).  This 
shows  sufficiently,  that  the  Israelites  had  a  share  in  the  naviga- 
tion of  the  seas  in  the  time  of  Isaiah;  although  it  can  not  be 
said  how  far  their  vessels  went.  Had  that  trade  ceased  with 
Jehoshaphat,  Isaiah  would  not  have  mentioned  it. 

It  can  not  be  ascertained  whether  navigation  was  monopolized 
by  the  government  or  not.  Our  annalist  mentions  the  fleet 
of  the  king  only.  The  silence  as  to  private  vessels  is  by  no 
means  an  evidence  that  no  such  vessels  existed.  The  general 
spirit  evinced  by  the  government  will  not  allow  us  to  think, 
that  the  private  citizen  was  excluded  from  marine  privileges, 
while  the  existence  of  a  royal  fleet  certainly  was  a  stimulus  to 
the  private  citizen  for  similar  enterprises.  These  agricultural 
and  commercial  enterprises  alone  account  for  opulence  and 
luxury  among  so  crowded  a  population  confined  to  so  small  a 
territory,  and  for  the  immense  sacrifices  of  armies  and  money 
by  Syria  and  Assyria  to  set  themselves  in  possession  of  that 
small  country. 

"We  turn  from  the  material  to  the  intellectual  state  of  the 
nation,  in  order  to  give  the  reader  a  complete  picture  of  that 
age.  The  intellectual  powers  of  a  commercial,  and  especially 
of  a  maritime  people,  are  always  better  developed  and  trained 
than  among  other  nations,  not  only  on  account  of  the  specu- 
lations connected  with  commercial  transactions,  but  also  on 
account  of  their  intercourse  with  different  nations  and  different 
classes  of  society,  each  of  which  is  a  school  to  train  the  mind. 
In  consequence  of  this,  commercial  nations  will  not  easily  sub- 


PERIOL>    IV. 


501 


mit  to  a  despotic  government,  nor  fall  into  a  general  abyss  of 
ignorance  and  stupidity. 

The  largest  party  of  the  nation  was  the  party  of  the  prophets. 
That  the  prophets  were  the  poets,  orators,  teachers,  lawyers, 
physicians,  statesmen  and  judges  of  the  nation,  has  been 
remarked  before.  We  will  add  here  a  few  details.  It  can  not 
be  denied,  that  some  medical  knowledge  was  exhibited  by 
Moses  in  the  laws  regarding  leprosy,  sexual  diseases,  and  com- 
munications. It  has  also  been  stated  above,  that  he  had  some 
knowledge  of  chemistry.  Clemens  Alexandrinus  (lib.  i,  p.  413), 
conjectures,  that  Moses  was  instructed  in  the  medical  science 
by  the  Egyptian  priests.  The  means  of  curing  appears  to 
have  been  cold  water,  and  some  special  and  simple  medical 
extracts ;  the  whole  of  which  was  but  an  empirical  knowledge. 
The  priests,  the  literati,  were  entrusted  with  the  medical  prac- 
tice in  as  far  as  it  was  connected  with  the  law  of  the  land, 
leaving  the  science  itself  and  its  practical  application  free  to 
the  public.  Samuel,  the  second  Moses,  introduced  into  his 
school,  whatever  that  time  had  produced,  in  knowledge  and 
science,  so  that  the  Z/'ne'  ha  Ncbiim,  or  pupils  of  the  prophets, 
were  also  the  physcians  of  the  nation.  As  among  all  other 
nations  of  antiquity,  science  was  not  divided  into  its  proper 
branches ;  the  learned  man  was  bound  to  know  every  thing.  It 
can  hardly  be  imagined,  that  those  physicians  gave  their  medi- 
cines to  the  patient  without  praying  for  him  to  God,  and 
bestowing  a  blessing  upon  the  sufferer.  Therefore,  the  medical 
practice,  as  almost  every  thing  else,  was  a  religious  affair,  as 
among  all  nations  of  antiquity.  When  Ahaziah  sent  to  the 
priests  of  Baal  Zebub,  to  inquire  of  the  priests  in  regard  to 
his  disease,  it  was  both  a  contempt  of  his  own  priests  and  of 
the  prophets.  The  remark  of  the  author  of  Chronicles  in  regard 
to  Asa  (II  Chron.  xvi,  12),  that  after  his  rupture  with  the 
prophets,  when  taken  sick  he  did  not  inquire  of  God,  but  of  the 
physicians,  is  another  evidence  to  the  same  effect.  The  advice 
of  the  prophet  Ahiah  was  asked  by  the  wife  of  Jerobeam,  when 
her  son  was  sick  (I  Kings  xiv,  12).  The  prophet  Elijah  cured 
the  son  of  the  widow  in  Zarephuth,  who,  in  consequence  of  a 


502  APPENDIX    TO 

disease,  was  so  exhausted,  that  he  swooned  away,  as  our  text 
(I  Kings  xvii,  17)  clearly  expresses,  which  has  been  falsely- 
understood  to  signify,  that  the  lad  was  dead;  his  diagnosis 
sent  to  king  Joram  (II  Chron.  xxi,  19),  and  to  king  Ahaziah 
(II  Kings  i,  4),  proved  exactly  true.  The  prophet  Elishah 
excelled  his  master  in  the  medical  art.  The  tradition  says 
about  him,  that  he  was  the  first  who  cured  dangerous  dis- 
eases.* He  restored  to  life  the  son  of  Shunamith,  who  was 
apparently  dead,  which  appears  to  have  been  the  consequence 
of  a  sunstroke;  he  knew  that  salt  was  the  best  means  to  improve 
the  waters  of  Jericho;  he  healed  Naaman  from  his  leprosy;  he 
knew  that  a  dosis  of  flour  makes  harmless  the  cucumis  colocyn- 
this  or  the  cucumeres  agrestes  (II  Kings  iv,  39-41),  and  the 
prognosis  which  he  made  to  Benhadad  (II  Kings  viii,  10),  was 
correct. 

Solomon  mentions  the  medical  art  and  medical  extracts 
(Prov.  iii,  8;  vi,  15;  xii,  18;  xxix,  1),  and  Josephus  (Antiq. 
b.  viii,  c.  2),  tells  us  of  Solomon,  that  he  understood  how  to 
banish  evil  demons  that  caused  evil  diseases,  most  likely 
insanity.  To  this,  Josephus  adds,  that  he  witnessed  a  medical 
cure  performed  on  an  insane  man,  by  one  whose  name  was 
Eleasar,  and  in  the  presence  of  the  emperor, Vespasian.  Eleasar 
cured  his  patient  by  placing  a  root  in  his  nostrils,  which  cure 
he  knew  to  be  a  tradition  dated  from  king  Solomon.  In 
Armenia  and  Abyssinia  the  natives  still  speak  of  traditions 
in  the  medical  knowledge,  which  originated  with  king  Solomon, 
and  which  are  yet  applied  in  practice. f  The  tradition  men- 
tions,! that  Solomon  composed  a  medical  treatise,  Sepher  ha- 
Rephnoth,  which  is  called  in  the  Jerusalemitic  Talmud,  Tables 
of  Cures  (Pesachim  89),  something  like  the  Anathemata  of 
the  Greeks,  which  the  king  Hezekiah  hid,  so  that  it  was  found 
no  more.  This  event  receives  some  evidence  from  the  fact, 
that  that  king  broke  the  brass  serpent  which  Moses  had  made, 

*Baba  Meziah,  865  and  Sandhedrin,  107. 

f  Kerem  Chemed  II,  p.  4t. 

t  Berachoth  49;  Erubin  57  and  Said.  I,  p.  GS1. 


PERIOD    IV.  503 

to  which  the  children  of  Israel  brought  sacrifices,  and  called  it 
Nehushthan;  as  the  serpent  of  Esculapius  was  called  by  tho 
Syrians.  It  appears  that  those  tables  of  cures,  together  with 
the  brass  serpent  of  Moses,  misled  the  people  to  the  worship 
of  Esculapius,  who  had  then  his  temple  in  Zidon.  This  would 
show,  that  the  medical  knowledge  was  not  limited  to  mere 
traditions,  which  is  almost  improbable  in  consideration  of  the 
early  practice  of  writing  among  the  Israelites ;  and  that  this 
knowledge  had  reached  such  a  degree  of  eminence,  that  Heze- 
kiah  could  hide  the  old  tables  of  cures,  around  which  the 
superstition  of  the  people  was  attracted,  without  running  the 
risk  of  extinguishing  that  knowledge  altogether. 

The  high  esteem  which  the  prophets  enjoyed  among  the 
people  was  well  deserved;  they  defended  boldly  the  rights  and 
liberties  of  the  people,  they  instructed  the  ignorant,  procured 
justice  for  the  offended,  and  cured  the  sick. 

The  passage  II  Chronicles  xxvi,  15,  shows  that  a  knowledge 
of  arithmetic  must  have  existed  among  the  Israelites.  The 
construction  of  ships,  their  voyages  on  the  sea,  and  their 
numerous  fortifications  and  castles,  bear  evidence  of  this  fact. 
We  have  no  means  of  ascertaining  the  degree  of  perfection 
reached  in  this  science. 

The  best  evidence,    however,   of  the  high  state  of  mental 
culture  is  the  nature  of  the  government,   and  the  literature  of 
the   age,    on    which   we    shall   directly  treat.     This  state  of 
mental  culture,  commerce,   agriculture  and  luxury,  did  by  no 
means  effeminate  the  nation,   although  it   was  productive   of 
profligacy  in  the  capitals  and  other  large  towns.     The  natural 
buoyancy  and  unabated  vigor  of  the  nation  is  shown  to  the  best 
advantage,    not    only   in  the    almost    continual    subjection    of 
Phelistia,  Edom,  Moab  and  Ammon,  but  also  in  the  century  of 
the  Syrian  war.     The  Syrians  outnumbered  the  Israelites  con- 
siderably; they  were  most  likely  supported  by  the  Assyrians, 
and  were  not  under  the   necessity  of  maintaining  garrisons  in 
depending  provinces.     The  best   evidence  to  this  effect  is  the 
final  catastrophe  of  Samaria,   taking  the  colossal  army  of  As- 
syria three  years  to  reduce  that  small  proviuce. 


594  "    appendix   to 

II.  THE  GOVERNMENT. 

It  has  been  noticed  above,  that  during  this  period  three 
political  parties  existed  in  Israel.  In  Judah  was  the  Davidian 
party,  which  supported  most  loyally  the  Davidian  dynasty,  and 
were  always  desirous  to  reunite  Israel  under  the  Davidian 
scepter.  To  this  party  the  priests  and  the  Levites  belonged, 
because  they  supported  the  temple  of  Solomon,  and  maintained 
the  Levites  in  their  legal  dignities.  It  was  by  the  blind  efforts 
of  that  party,  that  the  kingdom  was  divided,  and  that  the  kings 
of  Judah  could  commit  so  many  follies  and  crimes.  "We  find  at 
a  later  date  that  party  divided  in  their  sentiments  on  many  im- 
portant subjects.  Next  we  meet  in  Israel  the  royal  party 
supporting  the  ruling  dynasties,  the  religious  schism  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  idolatry  introduced 
by  Ahab  and  others  in  support  of  the  king.  It  was  by  their 
support  that  the  kings  of  Israel  committed  so  many  wrongs  on 
the  people.  While  the  Davidian  party  was  at  a  later  date  of 
this  period,  almost  exclusively  confined  to  Jerusalem,  the 
largest  towns  of  Judah  and  the  priests;  the  royal  party  of 
Israel  was  almost  entirely  limited  to  the  city  of  Samaria,  the 
largest  towns  of  Israel,  and  the  priests  of  Beth  El,  of  Dan, 
Baal,  Astarte,  &c,  &c.  Opposite  these  two  parties  stood  the 
party  of  the  prophets,  who  supported  no  dynasty,  favored  nO 
temple,  and  granted  no  privileges;  they  defended  the  laws  of 
Moses,  and  favored  only  those  rulers  who  faithfully  executed 
those  laws.  In  this  respect  they  were  the  conservative  party. 
They  acknowledged  the  hereditary  monarchy  based  upon  a 
primary  election  of  the  people,  as  long  as  the  ruler  did  not 
forfeit  his  claims  to  the  throne  by  a  violation  of  the  national 
compact,  but  if  such  claims  were  forfeited,  they  would  not 
suffer  the  son  of  the  king  to  maintain  the  throne,  never  de- 
posing the  king  they  had  elected.  In  this  respect  they  were 
the  revolutionary  party.  In  science  as  well  as  in  religion,  as 
we  shall  notice  hereafter,  they  were  the  progressive  party. 
They  were  for  the  most  time  strongly  united;  only  in  the  time 
of  Elijah  have  we  observed  a  rupture  in  their  ranks,  which 
however  was  repaired  by  the  prudence  of  Elijah  and  the  paci- 


PERIOD    IV.  505 

fying  course  of  Elishah.     During  the  last  years  of  Jerobeam 
II  that  party  was  disunited  on  account  of  the  military  despot- 
ism then  beginning  in  Israel,  which  gradually  prepared  the  fall 
of  Samaria.     In  Israel  that  party  was  omnipotent,  their  decrees 
were   unalterable,   and  their  will  made   and   dethroned  kings. 
In  Judah  they  exercised  some  influence  in  the  first  years  of  Asa, 
but  they  lost  it  again;  they  exercised  a  marked  influence  under 
Jehoshaphat.     Their  weight  was  most  felt  in  Judah  after  they 
had  abandoned  the  government  of  Israel  in  the  time  of  Uziah 
and  his  immediate  successors,  having  come  to  full  power  under 
Hezekiah.     They  had  a  regular  organization  throughout  the 
land,    maintaining    their  council,  in  which  the  decrees]  were 
passed,   and  then  pronounced  by  their  representative.     As  the 
defenders   of  the  Mosaic   laws   they  considered  Israel  as   one 
nation,  and  continually  endeavored  to  unite  the  two  kingdoms. 
They  were  opposed  to  the  Davidian  dynasty,  because  they  were 
in  power  contrary  to  the   will  of  the   majority   of  the  people. 
Still  they  supported  monarchs  of  that  dynasty  if  their  admin- 
istration was   beneficial  to  the   community.     As  the  defenders 
of  the  Mosaic  laws  they  never  forgot  the  ideal  of  that  law,  viz : 
the  mission  of  the  nation  to  promulgate  the  divine  verities 
upon  which  the  Mosaic  dispensation  was  based,   in  politics, 
justice,  morals  and  religion.     This  sublime  idea  resounds  in  all 
their  speeches,    and  is  reflected  in  all  their  actions.     In  this 
sense  they  operated  upon  all  nations  with  whom  they  came  in 
contact.     Always   keeping  in  sight   that  ideal  of  the  nation, 
they  did   not    sacrifice    its    future    interests    for    transitory 
ones,   and  ^therefore   they  were   opposed  to  an  extensive   com- 
merce.      This    doctrine    was    laid    down    by    Moses,    and    it 
was     immutably    defended    by    the    prophets.       Commercial 
enterprises  always  bring  the   wealth    directly  into  the   large 
cities,  and  especially  into  the  capitals  of  commercial  countries, 
although  it  naturally  reacts  upon  the  whole  country,  therefore 
the  party  of  the  prophets  was  weakest  in  the  capitals  and  large 
towns,    numbering   its    strength    among    the    country    people. 
Elijah,  who  appears  to  have  been  most  inspired  by  the  idea  of 
maintaining  the  Mosaic  laws,  never  ventured  to  show  himself 


506  APPENDIX   TO 

either  in  Samaria  or  Jerusalem;  in  Judah,  which  had  a  much 
larger  share  in  the  commerce  of  the  nation  than  Israel,  the 
prophets  had  considerably  less  influence  than  in  Israel.  We 
may  therefore  say,  that  there  were  but  two  parties  during  this 
period;  a  commercial  part)',  which  was  thoroughly  royal  in 
Judah  and  in  Israel,  and  an  agricultural  party  which  was 
thoroughly  democratic.  While  the  former  party  always  sup- 
ported the  governments  apprehending  danger  to  the  commerce 
in  violent  changes  of  the  government ;  the  latter  supported  the 
law,  opposing  every  one  who  acted  contrary  to  it,  without 
fearing  the  inconveniences  and  dangers  arising  from  such  erup- 
tions. The  kings  of  Judah  were  themselves  merchants,  and 
favored  commercial  enterprises,  but  as  soon  as  the  weight  of 
the  prophets  was  strongty  felt,  Uziah  favored  agriculture  by 
personal  attendance  (II  Chron.  xxvi,  10).  In  Israel,  however, 
after  it  had  reached  again  a  considerable  height  of  prosperity 
under  Jerobeam  II  and  Menahem,  the  nature  of  its  enlarged 
territory  and  of  its  connection  with  the  Euphrates  enlarged 
also  the  commercial  enterprises.  Therefore  the  party  of  the 
prophets  was  most  strenuously  opposed,  and  a  military  despot- 
ism usurped  the  place  of  law  and  liberty.  Still  the  prophets 
would  have  found  opportunity  to  dethrone  that  new  system,  as 
well  as  they  succeeded  in  reforming  Ahab ;  but  the  evil  which 
they  had  predicted  came  too  soon;  the  colossal  Assyria,  attracted 
by  the  wealth  of  Israel  and  Tyre,  put  an  end  to  the  opposition 
of  the  parties.  This  view  of  the  subject  also  explains  the  intro- 
duction of  Tyrian  idolatry  under  Ahab,  its  connection  with  the 
assassination  of  the  prophets,  and  their  peculiar  aversion  to  it. 
It  has  been  asserted,  that  this  opposition  of  the  parties 
naturally  ruined  the  country,  which  is  by  no  means  true. 
Nothing  but  the  immense  power  of  Assyria  and  the  attractive 
wealth  of  Israel  and  Tyre  ruined  Israel.,  The  conflicts  of  the 
parties  were  well  calculated  to  maintain  the  country  in  continual 
activity,  so  that  despotism  could  not  triumph  for  a  long  time, 
while  the  exertions  of  the  other  side,  being  the  livelier  on 
account  of  the  opposition,  tended  to  maintain  and  improve  the 
commerce.     The  consequences  would  have  been,  that  the  party 


PERIOD    IV.  5(,7 

of  the  prophets  would  have  strongly  united  with  Hezekiah,  to 
Which  the  foundation  had  been  previously  laid.  The  ancient 
opposition  between  the  two  kingdoms  would  have  been  easily 
overcome,  after  Israel  had  suffered  for  some  time  under  the  yoke 
of  military  despotism,  and  the  nation  would  have  been  reunited. 
So  at  least  an  ancient  oracle,  recorded  in  Sanhcdrin,  says, 
rrffD  irrprn  nwyb  mpn  vpa  "God  desired  to  make  Jfezekiah 
to  the  Messiah  "  to  the  ruler  of  the  whole  nation  of  Israel. 

Having  described  the  interests,  views  and  demands  of  the 
different  political  parties,  it  will  be  easy  for  the  reader  to  look 
through  the  political  fabric  of  the   governments.     The  consti- 
tution and  the  laws  of  both  kingdoms    underwent    no    material 
change,  with  the  exception  of  the   manner  of  representation  of 
the  people,  and  the  judicial  reforms  of  Jehoshaphat.     In  Israel, 
the  constitution  and  laws  appear  to  have  remained  unaltered,' 
slight  amendments  excepted.     The  attempts  of  Ahab  and  others 
to  abolish  that  constitution  have  been  noticed  before.     Towards 
the  close  of  the  administration  of  Jerobcam  II,  the   constitu- 
tional rights    of  the  people   were  invaded,  and  we    hear   the 
prophets   complain  about  violence  and  injustice;  but  Iloscah, 
the  last  king  of  Israel,  restored  the  constitution,  as  our  histo- 
rian testifies   (II  Kings,  xvii,    2).     In  Judah   after   the    first 
excitement    was  over,  Asa  reorganized   the   representation  of 
the  people,  and  the  constitution  was   restored,  which  was  fre- 
quently suspended,   by  the  son  and  grandson  of  Jehoshaphat, 
and  by  Athaliah,  and  towards  the  end  of  this  period  by  Ahaz, 
but  the  other  kings  never  dared  openly  to  invade  the  constitu- 
tion and  the  laws  of  the  country,    as  has  been  remarked  in 
former  places.     On  the  whole,  it  may  be  said  that  no  attempt 
of  the  rulers  and  their  parties  proved  successful  to  deprive  the 
Israelites,  for  a  considerable  time,  of  their  constitutional  liberty, 
which  is  more  than   ordinary  proof  of  the  intelligence  of  that 
people. 

III.   RELIGION. 

Religion  was  too  much  identified   with   the    laws    and   the 
policy  of  the  country  for  it  to  be  expected   that  the   political 


538  APPENDIX    TO 

parties  should  not  also  differ  in  religious  respects.  The  royalists 
of  Judah  clung  to  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  and  to^all  its  im- 
posing ceremonies,  the  splendor  of  the  court  making  no  mean 
part  of  them.  Jerusalem  was  the  ecclesiastical  capital  of 
Judah,  and  the  king  was  the  most  important joersonage  in  the 
temple  after  the  high  priest;  wherefore  we  see  even  the  most 
wicked  kings  of  the  Davidian  dynasty,  as  the  most  pious  of 
them,  publicly  venerated  the  temple,  and  its  ministers;  in  which 
only  the  descendants  of  Jezebel  made  an  exception,  and  the 
pious  Jotham,  on  account  of  his  fathers'  difficulties  with  the 
priests.  It  was  therefore  not  unusual  that  one  paid  homage 
to  the  different  idols,  and  at  the  same  time  did  not  neglect 
to  visit  the  temple  and  devote  a  sacrifice  to  the  chief  God  of 
the  land,  to  Jehovah. 

The  tenrple  service  soon  degenerated,  as  it  naturally  must 
have  done,  to  mere  formality,  and  outward  worship  {Isaiah  i, 
10-18;  ibid  xxix,  13,  14). 

The  royal  party  in  Israel  adhered  to  the  temple  at  Bethel; 
the  one  at  Dan  had  fallen  into  neglect  on  account  of  that  place 
having  been  occupied  for  nearly  a  century  by  the  Syrians ;  and 
it  fell  again  into  the  hands  of  the  Assyrians  about  twenty 
years  previous  to  the  fall  of  Samaria.  The  worship  at  Beth 
El,  as  has  been  remarked  before,  differed  from  the  one  at  Jeru- 
salem only  in  symbols,  which  however  represented  the  same 
ideas.  Every  symbol  worship,  however  ingenious  and  plain,  is 
conducive  to  real  idolatry,  and  in  fact  produced  always  the  same 
effect  among  all  nations  of  antiquity.  The  symbols  of  the  tem- 
ple at  Beth  El  finally  degenerated  into  idols,  as  well  as  the 
brass  serpent  of  Moses,  and  the  whole  of  the  temple  at  Jerusa- 
lem, which  became,  so  to  say,  one  huge  idol.  The  prophets  of 
that  time  inform  us,  that  the  symbols  at  Beth  El  were  idol- 
ized, and  that  at  Beth  El  and  Jerusalem  the  same  veneration 
was  paid  to  insignificant  forms  and  external  ceremonials  which 
exercise  no  benevolent  influence  upon  the  heart  of  the  wor- 
shiper.*    The  author  of  the  book  of  Kings  had  before  him  the 

*  Hosea  iv  and  v.  Amos  v,  iS-27,  who  speaks  almost  the  same  words  as 
Isaiah  I. 


PERIOD    IV.  5C0 

Beth  El  worship  in  its  worst  corruption,  for  which  reason  ho 
condemned  it  in  the  strongest  terms.  This  state  of  religion 
together  with  the  general  prosperity  and  the  opulence  of  the 
class  which  were  principally  merchants,  were  the  efficient 
causes  of  the  progress  of  idolatry  among  the  people.  The 
kings  introduced  it  for  political  reasons,  and  the  friends  of  inno- 
vation, of  external  pomp,  of  brilliant  ceremonies,  of  unmeaning 
forms,  the  gay,  the  licentious,  and  the  llattcrcrs  of  the  kings, 
easily  and  gladly  embraced  it. 

The  altars  on  the  heights  were  convenient  places  to  wor- 
ship numerous  deities  besides  Jehovah.  When  a  king  changed 
the  policy  of  his  predecessor,  he  could  destroy  the  temples, 
altars,  idols,  and  statues  erected  in  the  cities  to  different  gods; 
but  he  could  hardly  control  those  heights  where  Jehovah,  no 
less  than  Baal,  was  worshiped.  Therefore  the  prophets  opposed 
those  heights  notwithstanding  their  being  sanctioned  by  the 
lavr ;  and  the  priests  who  received  their  portion  of  the  sacrifices 
brought  on  those  altars,  supported  them.  The  prophets  were 
opposed  to  all  sorts  of  sacrifices,  which  was  one  of  the  causes 
producing  the  conflict  between  priests  and  prophets.  The 
latter  appear  to  have  been  in  favor  of  the  plain  synagogue 
worship,  which  was  attempted  at  the  time  of  Jehoshaphat,  but 
which  could  not  be  introduced  generally  on  account  of  the 
altars  on  the  heights  and  the  opposition  of  the  priests.  The 
author  of  Kings,  who  as  his  accounts  of  Elijah  and  Elishah 
prove,  was  one  from  the  party  of  the  prophets,  therefore,  zeal- 
ously opposed  the  heights.  Still  the  fall  t  of  those  altars  and 
the  triumph  of  synagogue  worship  was  not  eifected  until  the 
reign  of  Hezekiah. 

The  class  of  people  which  most  easily  and  readily  embraced 
idolatry,  was  chiefly  confined  to  the  two  capitals,  wherefore 
the  prophet  Micah,  who  flourished  at  the  end  of  this  and  at 
the  beginning  of  the  next  period,  could  say,  "What  is  the 
transgression  of  Jacob?  is  it  not  Samaria?  And  what  are  the 
high  places  of  Judah?  are  they  not  Jerusalem  ??'  (i,  5.)  There 
can  be  no  doubt,  that  many  in  the  large  towns  both  of  Judah 
and  of  Israel,  yielded  to  the  same  corruption;  but  the  majority 


510 


APPENDIX    TO 


of  the  people,  the  party  of  the  prophets,  were  sound  in  morals 
and  politics,  and  also  in  religion,  which  was  with  them  but  a 
part  of  the  whole  system. 

In  the  time  of  Solomon  we  observed  already  a  mighty 
change  in  religion,  losing  its  mystical  and  symbolical  character, 
and  appearing  in  the  pure  light  of  intellect;  it  ceased  to  be  a 
matter  of  sentiment,  of  dim  presentiments,  and  became  a  matter 
of  consciousness,  striking  its  roots  into  the  intellect.  Forms 
and  ceremonials  play  but  a  very  small  part  in  the  Davidian 
psalms  and  in  the  Solomonic  writings.  Justice  and  righteous- 
ness, virtue  and  charity,  wisdom  and  truth,  are  the  abstract 
ideas  which  they  desired  to  see  realized  by  the  religious  actions 
of  man.  In  this  sense  religion  was  understood  by  the  prophets, 
who  adhered  for  a  long  time  to  the  kings  of  Israel,  notwith- 
standing the  golden  calves  at  Beth  El  and  Dan;  and  protested 
against  the  house  of  David,  notwithstanding  the  temple  of 
Solomon.  They  raised  their  exhorting  voice  against  the  cere- 
monialists  of  the  temple,  no  less  than  against  those  of  the  Baal 
temples;  and  the  priests  of  Jerusalem,  no  less  than  the  priests 
of  Beth  El,  were  not  seldom  the  objects  of  their  sore  displeas- 
ure.' No  prophet  encouraged  Joash  when  renovating  the 
temple,  nor  did  ever  one  of  them  exhort  the  people  to  support 
priests,  and  Levites,  and  temple  and  altar.  The  pious  Jotham 
never  went  to  the  temple ;  still  neither  Isaiah  nor  any  other 
prophet  spoke  about  it.  Samuel,  the  father  of  the  prophets, 
already  said:  I  Samuel,  xv,  22,  23,  "Hath  the  Lord  as  great 
delight  in  burnt  offerings  and  sacrifices,  as  in  obeying  the  voice 
of  the  Lord?  Behold,  to  obey  is  better  than  sacrifice;  and  to 
hearken  than  the  fat  of  rams.  For  rebellion  is  as  the  sin  of 
witchcraft,  and  stubbornness  is  as  iniquity  and  idolatry."  The 
same  voice  is  echoed  by  David  in  Psalms  li,  18,  19,  and  xl, 
7;  by  Asaph,  ibid,  1,  8-15,  by  Isaiah,  Hosea  Amos,  and  espe- 
cially by  the  prophet  Micah,  who  said  vi,  6-8:  "Wherewith 
shall  I  come  before  the  Lord,  and  bow  myself  before  the  high 
God?  Shall  I  come  before  him  with  burnt  offerings,  with  calves 
of  a  year  old?  Will  the  Lord  be  pleased  with  thousands  of 
rams,  or  with  ten  thousands   of  rivers  of  oil?  Shall  I  give  my 


PERIOD    IV.  511 

first-born  for  my  transgression,  the  fruit  of  my  body  for  the 
sin  of  my  soul?"  "  He  hath  shewed  thee,  0  man,  what  is  good ; 
and  what  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee,  but  to  do  justly,  and 
to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly  with  thy  God?"  This 
voice  still  echoes  in  the  words  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah  vii, 
21-23:  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel:  Put 
your  burnt  offerings  unto  your  sacrifices  and  eat  flesh.  For  I 
spake  not  unto  your  fathers,  nor  commanded  them  in  the  day 
that  I  brought  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  concerning  burnt 
offerings  or  sacrifices;  but  this  thing  commanded  I  them,  say- 
ing, Obey  my  voice,  and  I  will  be  your  God,  and  ye  shall  be 
my  people :  and  walk  ye  in  all  the  ways  that  I  have  command- 
ed you,  that  it  may  be  well  unto  you."  It  is  evident,  that  the 
prophets  never  brought  sacrifices,  nor  did  they  teach  their 
friends  to  do  so  either  in  Jerusalem  or  in  Beth  El.  To  them 
religion  was  not  a  set  of  observances,  but  a  set  of  principles. 
They  distinguished  in  the  Mosaic  dispensation  between  the 
divine  ideas  of  eternal  truth,  and  the  external  forms,  which, 
on  account  of  necessity,  were  adopted  by  Moses.  Their  religion 
consisted  in  a  firm  confidence  in  God,  in  the  practice  of  justice, 
righteousness,  charity,  patriotism  and  humanity,  and  in  the 
endeavor  to  purify  the  heart  and  to  elevate  the  mind  of  all  men. 
Their  religion  was  not  confined  to  either  the  walls  of  a  temple 
or  the  limits  of  a  country;  they  bore  their  sublime  principles 
as  far  as  the  merchants  of  Israel  traveled  to  buy  or  to  sell 
goods.  Where  others  sought  for  material  gain,  they  promul- 
gated the  principles  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  mindful  of  the 
mission  of  Israel  to  other  nations.  The  wealth  accumulated 
by  their  commercial  brethren  vanished;  but  the  spirit  of  those 
heroic  champions  of  truth  still  resounds  from  sunrise  to  sunset, 
and  still  animates  the  hearts  of  civilized  nations.  We  have 
seen  the  influence  which  that  party  exercised  at  Damascus  and 
Nineveh.  No  doubt  can  be  entertained  that  the  influence 
rested  upon  the  basis  of  religion.  The  intelligent  portion  of 
the  East  sympathized  with  the  pure  and  sublime  principles  of 
the  prophets,  which,  as  the  sequel  will  teach,  undermined  hea- 
thenism.    To  this  not  only  the  dispersed  Israelites  who  adhered 


512  APPENDIX    TO 

to  their  religion  contributed  considerably,  but  also  those  who 
embraced  heathenism. 

Religion  made  immense  progress  during  this  period,  not  only 
in  regard  to  the  development  of  its  vital  principles  and  bring- 
ing them  before  the  light  of  consciousness,  but  also  in  regard 
to  the  number  of  the  faithful,  a  mighty  progress  was  achieved; 
for  the  party  of  the  prophets  by  far  outnumbered  the  other 
parties,  as  we  have  seen  in  the  political  history.  Idolatry  was 
by  no  means  so  common  nor  so  revolting  as  it  appears  to  be 
from  a  superficial  examination  of  the  prophetical  scriptures. 
The  sabbath,  feasts,  new-moon  days,  as  prescribed  in  the 
Mosaic  laws,  were  observed  both  in  Judah  and  Israel,  with 
the  exception  of  the  feast  of  booths,  which  Jerobeam  post- 
poned to  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  eighth  month.*  The  names  and 
kinds  of  sacrifices,  too,  remained  unaltered;  so  that  we  may 
say,  the  external  religion  of  Israel  remained  unchanged,  with 
the  exception  of  the  symbols,  which  were  different  in  Israel, 
and  entirely  disregarded  by  the  prophets. 

IV.  LITERATURE. 

While  the  political  agitation  after  the  death  of  Solomon 
exercised  a  disadvantageous  influence  upon  the  literary  employ- 
ment of  the  prophets  and  Levites,  so  that  the  whole  of  the 
literary  productions  consisted  but  of  a  few  psalms  which  we 
have  noticed  in  the  political  history,  the  period  of  the  Syrian 
war  set  a  total  stop  to  the  progress  of  literature,  and  it  is  only 
in  the  time  of  Jerobeam  II,  when  prosperity  was  restored  to 
the  country,  that  we  see  a  revival  of  letters.  This,  however, 
was  not  the  case  with  the  historical  literature.  The  author  of 
Chronicles  and  also  the  author  of  Kings,  have  preserved  the 
names  of  authors  and  of  books  which  have  not  reached  us. 
The  words  of  the  prophet  Shemaiah,  and  Iddo  the  seer,  concern- 
ing Rehabeam  (II  Chron.  xii,  15).  The  inquirers  of  the 
prophet  Iddo  concerning  Abiarn  (II  Chron.  xiii,  23).     The  Book 

*Vide  I  Kings  xiii,  32;  II  Kings  iv,  23;  Hosea  ii,  13;  Amos  v,  21;  Isaiah 
i,  13,  14. 


PERIOD    IV.  513 

of  the  Kings  of  Israel  (II  Chron.  xx,  34).  The  Inquiries 
into  the  Book  of  the  Kings  (II  Chron.  xxiv,  27).  The  Book 
of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  (II  Chron.  xxv,  26;  xxvii,  7; 
xxviii,  27;  1  Chron.  ix,  1).  The  Book  of  the  Word  of  Solo- 
mon (I  Kings  xi,  41).  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Israel 
(I  Kings  xvi,  19,  &c),  and  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah 
(I  Kings  xvi,  29,  &c). 

The  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Israel,  mentioned  by  the 
author  of  Kings,  may  be  identical  with  the  Book  of  the  Kings 
of  Israel,  mentioned  by  the  author  of  Chronicles;  and  the 
Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  mentioned  by  the  former, 
may  be  identical  with  the  Inquiries  into  the  Book  of  the  Kings; 
which  two  books  appear  to  have  been  composed  from  the  ori- 
ginal chronographic  compositions  mentioned  before.  But  the 
Book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  of  Israel  is  by  no  means 
identical  with  the  Book  of  Kings,  which  we  possess;  because 
the  geneological  tables  mentioned  to  have  been  contained 
therein  are  not  found  in  our  book,  and  reference  is  made  to  it 
as  containing  more  particulars  of  history  than  the  Chronicles, 
which  is  by  no  means  the  case  with  our  Kings.  The  Book  of 
the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  is  first  mentioned  in  Chronicles, 
after  the  death  of  Uziah,  in  the  period  of  the  revival  of  letters. 
It  appears,  therefore,  that  about  the  time  of  the  exile  of  Israel 
a  large  Chronicle  of  the  two  kingdoms  was  written,  in  which 
all  the  former  sources  and  traditions  were  used. 

The  histories  of  the  kings  were  not  written  by  one  man. 
The  history  of  each  king  was  written  in  one  of  those  respective 
books  by  another  man.  The  prophet  Jehu  wrote  the  history  of 
Jehoshaphat  in  the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel,  because  that 
king  maintained  friendly  relations  with  Israel.  Isaiah  wrote 
the  history  of  Uziah.  Those  books  appear  to  have  been  de- 
posited in  the  royal  archives,  and  were  controlled  by  the  private 
compositions  of  the  prophets,  from  all  of  which  two  books  were 
afterwards  composed,  the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and 
Israel  mentioned  above,  and  the  abridgement  of  history,  or  the 
Book  of  Kings,  which  is  in  our  possession. 

Being  aware  of  the  sources  which  the  author  of  Kings  pos- 
33 


514  APPENDIX    TO 

sessed,  it  is  proper  to  inquire  into  the  age  of  that  book.  That 
the  first  four  chapters  of  Kings  belong  to  the  Book  of  Samuel 
has  been  stated  before.  We  shall  now  attempt  to  prove,  that 
this  book  originally  extended  from  I  Kings  v  to  II  Kings  xvii,  7. 
The  rest  of  the  seventeenth  chapter  is  an  addition  made  by  the 
compilers  of  the  canon,  and  the  last  eight  chapters  were  writ- 
ten in  a  much  later  age,  as  the  conclusion  of  the  twenty-fifth 
chapter  clearly  indicates.  The  author  of  the  last  eight  chapters 
distinguishes  himself  from  the  author  of  the  former  part : 

1.  In  his  praise  and  his  censure  passed  on  the  kings.  He  says 
of  Jlezekiah  (II  Kings  xviii,  5,  6),  "He  trusted  in  the  Lord  God 
of  Israel;  so  that  after  him  was  none  like  him  among  all  the 
kings  of  Judah,  nor  any  that  were  before  him.  For  he  clave  to 
the  Lord,  and  departed  not  from  following  him,  but  kept  his 
commandments,  which  the  Lord  commanded  Moses."  Of 
Joshiah,  he  says  (II  Kings  xxiii,  25),  "  And  like  unto  him  was 
there  no  king  before  him,  that  turned  to  the  Lord  with  all  his 
heart,  and  with  all  his  soul,  and  with  all  his  might,  according 
to  all  the  law  of  Moses;  neither  after  him  arose  there  any  like 
him."  Of  Menassah,  he  says  (II  Kings  xxi,  2),  "And  he  did 
that  zvhich  was  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord,  after  the  abomina- 
tions of  the  heathen,  whom  the  Lord  cast  out  before  the  children 
of  Israel."  Of  Jehoahaz,  he  remarks  (II  Kings  xxiii,  32), 
"And  he  did  that  which  was  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord, 
according  to  all  that  his  fathers  had  done."  Of  Jehoiakim,  he 
says  (II  Kings  xxiii,  37),  "And  he  did  that  which  teas  evil  in  the 
sight  of  the  Lord,  according  to  all  that  his  fathers  had  done ; " 
quite  different  from  the  author  of  the  former  portion  of  the  book. 

2.  While  the  first  author  but  once  mentions  the  laws  of 
Moses  when  quoting  from  it  (II  Kings  xiii,  6),  and  then  says 
plainly,  "  the  book  of  the  law  of  Moses;"  the  author  of  the 
last  part  frequently  mentions  >the  laws,  not  only  after  the  Book 
of  the  Covenant  was  found,  but  also  before  that  (II  Kings  xviii,  6, 
12;  xxi,  8),  setting  frequently  to  the  name  of  Moses,  the  epi- 
thet "  my  servant,"  which  is  not  met  with  in  the  former  part. 

3.  He  speaks  of  the  Hebrew  language  under  the  name  of 
Jehudith  (II  Kings  xviii,  26,  28),  which  word  is  of  a  very  late 


PERIOD    IV.  515 

origin,  while  the  prophet  Jonah  calls  himself  still  a  Hebrew 
{Jonah  i,  9),  although  that  book  was  written  but  shortly  before 
the  exile.  The  author  of  II  Kings  xviii,  9-12  narrates,  again 
the  end  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  to  which  the  whole  of  the 
former  chapter  is  devoted,  which  plainly  indicates  a  different 
author. 

The  former  part  of  Kings  was  not  written  in  Judah,  for  the 
most  of  its  space  is  devoted  to  the  kings  and  prophets  of  Israel; 
the  kings  of  Judah  are  only  mentioned  on  account  of  the  proper 
connection  of  history;  and  the  prophets  of  Judah,  Hosea,  Amos, 
Micah,  Obadiah  and  Isaiah,  are  not  mentioned  at  all,  which 
would  certainly  not  have  happened,  had  the  book  been  written 
in  Judah.  "VVe  are  the  more  entitled  to  this  assertion,  as  the 
author  devotes  a  large  space  to  the  prophets  of  Israel.  When 
arrived  at  Jerobeam  II,  our  author  becomes  uncommonly  brief 
and  dry,  which  must  be  ascribed  to  the  disgust  of  the  prophets, 
at  the  military  despotism  then  beginning,  which  was  the  cause 
of  their  losing  their  influence  upon  the  government,  and  to 
the  supposition  of  the  author  that  the  facts  having  recently 
transpired,  were  still  living  in  the  memory  of  the  people.  All 
these  circumstances  conduct  us  to  the  date  when  that  part  of 
Kings  containing  the  history  of  this  period  and  of  Solomon  was 
written;  it  must  be  placed  shortly  after  the  fall  of  Samaria,  to 
which  there  are  two  more  evidences. 

1.  I  Kings  viii,  8,  when  speaking  of  the  deposition  of  the  ark 
and  the  tables  contained  in  it,  it  is  stated,  that  they  were  there 
up  to  this  day.  Ibid,  xii,  19,  when  speaking  of  the  revolt  of 
Israel  of  the  house  of  David,  our  author  says,  that  they  were 
separated  from  the  house  of  David  up  to  this  day;  consequently 
both  the  temple  and  the  throne  of  David  must  have  existed  in 
the  time  of  our  author.  II  Kings,  viii,  22,  when  speaking  of 
the  revolt  of  Edom,  it  is  stated  that  the  Edomites  ever  after 
attempted  to  throw  off  the  yoke*  of  Judah  up  to  this  day ;  con- 
sequently Edom  must  have  been  under  the  government  of  Judah 
in  the  time  of  our  author.     Our    author.  Kings  xiv,  7,  when 

*  ppfi'l  comes  riot  with  a  following  a  but  with  mri 


516  APPENDIX   TO 

speaking  of  the  recapture  of  Edom,  says,  that  its  capital  was 
called  Jekatheal  up  to  this  day,  of  which  name  no  trace  is  found 
after  the  exile. 

2.  The  frequent  quotation,  and  imitations,  of  verses  of  the 
Pentateuch  and  other  ancient  authors,  shows  that  he  did  not 
flourish  after  the  Hebrew  literature  had  received  a  new  impulse, 
and  had  become  original  by  the  labors  of  Isaiah.  The  quota- 
tions and  imitations  are  so  numerous  that  we  can  refer  to  but 
few  of  them:  I  Kings  v,  9,  of  Genesis  xxii,  17;  ibid  viii,  9, 
of  Exodus  xl,  20,  xxxv,  27;  ibid  verse  12,  of  Levit.  xvi,  2; 
ibid  verse  31  of  Levit.  iv,  27;  ibid  verses  33,  of  Numb,  xiv, 
42;  ibid  verse  35,  of  Deut.  xi,  17;  ibid  verses  46-50,  of  Deut, 
xxx ;  ibid  ix,  6,  of  Deut.  xxviii  15;  xi  16;  ibid  verses  7-8,  of 
Deut.  xxviii,  37,  xxix,  23;  ibid  xi,  2,  of  Deut.  vii,  2-4;  ibidxii, 
24  of  Deut.  i  42;  ibid  verse  28,  of  Exodus  xxii,  4;  ibid  xvii, 
31,  of  Genesis  xxxvii,  10;  ibid  verse  38, :  of  Genesis  xxii,  9; 
verse  39  of  Lev.  ix,  24;  ibid  xix,  8,  of  Exodus  iii,  1,  xxiv,  18, 
II  Kings  1,  3,  of  Exodus  xiv,  11;  ibid  iv,  16,  of  Genesis  xviii,  10; 
verse  17,  of  Genesis  xxi,  2;  ibid  xiv,  6,  of  Deut.  xxiv,  16,  &c. 

These  testimonies  lead  us  to  the  conclusion,  that  the  book  of 
Kings,  from  I  Kings  v  to  II  Kings  xvii,  7,  was  written  by  one  of 
the  friends  of  Israel,  either  priest  or  prophet,  in  commemora- 
tion of  that  kingdom,  and  that  it  was  written  shortly  after 
the  fall  of  Samaria.  This  prompted  the  author  of  Chronicles 
to  compose  a  similar  synopsis  of  the  history  of  Judah,  which 
We  shall  treat  upon  in  its  proper  place.  The  history  of  the 
kings  of  Judah  must  not  be  supposed  to  be  found  in  the  book 
of  Kings,  and  consequently  the  history  of  the  priests  and  Le- 
vites  must  not  be  sought  there. 

The  Pentateuch  embrar.es,  besides  the  law,  three  different 
kinds  of  style;  historical,  psalmodical,  and  prophetical.  The 
former  two  gave  the  impulse  to  two  divisions  of  the  Hebrew 
literature,  the  historical  and  psalmodical,  which  go  through 
all  periods  of  history,  as  the  legal  portions  of  the  Pentateuch 
was  the  impulse  to  the  proverbial  philosophy.  The  prophetical 
style  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  chief  portion  of  which  is  in 
Deuteronomy,   gave  birth  to  the  prophetic  literature,  which 


PERIOD     IV.  517 

had  its  origin  in  our  period.  Aside  of  the  compositions 
of  this  kind  that  have  not  reached  us,  Amos  was  the  first  who 
wrote  prophecies,  to  the  proper  understanding  of  which  we 
have  already  contributed  our  share.  This  prophet  flourished 
in  the  days  of  Uziah  and  Jerobeam  II  (Amos  i,  1).  The  fact, 
that  but  two  kings  are  mentioned  to  have  coexisted  with  the 
prophet,  while  with  Hosea  and  Isaiah  a  larger  number  of  kings 
is  mentioned,  leads  us  to  believe,  that  he  flourished  between 
the  27th  year  of  Jerobeam  II  and  the  death  of  that  monarch. 
As  the  first  writer  in  that  branch  of  literature,  he  depended 
yet  considerably  on  his  pattern,  the  Pentateuch,  which  he 
anticipates  with  his  hearers,  and  to  which  he  continually  resorts 
for  words,  phrases  and  pictures,  and  not  seldom  also  for  transi- 
tions; so  *that  the  whole  composition  still  sounds  like  the 
Deuteronomy  of  Moses. 

Among  the  numerous  references  to  the  Pentateuch  we  will 
notice  but  few.  Amos  i,  2;  the  history  of  Esau,  Genesis 
xxvii,  and  the  law  regarding  Edom,  Deut.  xxiii,  8,  are  assumed 
to  be  known.  Chapter  ii,  2,  is  taken  from  Numbers  xxi,  28, 
and  xxiv,  17;  ibid  6-12,  is  entirely  composed  of  terms  of  the 
Pentateuch.  Ibid  iii,  2,  is  taken  from  Deut.  xiv,  2;  ibid  verse  7, 
from  Genesis  xviii,  17;  ibid  verse  14,  from  Exod.  xvii,  2,  xxix, 
12,  Levit.  iv,  25;  ibid  iv,  4,  from  Numb,  xxiv,  3,  Deut.  xiv,  28, 
xxvi,  12;  ibid  verse  11,  from  Genesis  xix,  25;  ibid  v,  21,  from 
Numb,  xxix,  35 ;  ibid  verse  25,  from  Deut.  ii,  7 ;  ibid  viii,  5,  from 
Deut.  xxv,  13-16.  The  whole  composition  is  impressed  with 
the  character  of  the  zealous  peasant,  who  without  pretensions 
to  learning  poured  forth  a  current  of  inspired  words  against  the 
wickedness  of  king  and  people  disobeying  the  God  of  Israel, 
magnifying  in  many  respects  the  existing  evil,  as  the  moralists 
of  all  ages  and  nations  have  done,  and  speaking  so  much  in 
general  terms,  that  the  expounders  of  the  Bible  have  frequently 
been  led  into  the  mistake  of  supposing  the  whole  nation  was 
corrupted,  as  if  there  was  a  possibility  that  prophets  could  be 
educated  in  a  corrupt  community,  and  forgetting  that  the  prophet 
spoke  to  the  wicked  only. 

The  younger   contemporary,   who   outlived   Amos,  was  the 


518  APPENDIX   TO 

prophet  Hosea,  upon  whom  the  former  exercised  no  influence. 
He  flourished  between  the  last  year  of  Jerobeam  II,  and  the  first 
year  of  Hezekiah  {Hosea  i,  1),  about  fifty-three  to  fifty-four 
years,  and  must  have  reached  an  advanced  age.  In  connection 
with  Amos,  Hosea  may  safely  be  called  the  father  of  the 
prophetic  literature.  His  speeches  totally  emerge  from  the 
Pentateuch,  which  he  assumes  to  be  known  by  all,  and  with- 
out the  aid  of  which  many  passages  of  the  book  of  Amos  are 
altogether  unintelligible.  In  the  first  three  chapters,  the  union 
of  God  with  Israel  is  so  plainly  identified  with  the  state  of 
marriage  union ;  idolatry  and  apostacy  are  so  unceremoniously 
represented  by  adultery  and  whoredom,  that  many  of  the  com- 
mentators were  led  to  believe  the  prophet  really  referred  to 
outward  unchastity,  upon  which  he  touches  as  a  consequence 
of  spiritual  aberrations;  so  that  we  can  not  suppose  for  a 
moment,  the  prophet  did  not  refer  to  images  and  phrases  well 
known  to  the  community,  which  we  really  find,  Exodus  xxxiv, 
15,  16,  Leviticus  xix  29,  xx,  5,  7,  Numbers  xiv,  33,  and  Deut. 
xxiii,  17,  19,  which  he  assumed  as  known  to  every  one  of  his 
hearers  and  readers.  The  peculiar  terms  of  pnx,  hdt,  S^nn, 
tsnp,  ntrjp,  and  the  hiphil  form  mm  with  the  following  nnx 
are  peculiar  to  the  passages  of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  chap- 
ters of  Hosea  referred  to  above.  It  is  therefore  evident,  that  the 
prophet  had  those  passages  of  the  Pentateuch  in  view.  Our 
position  is  sufficiently  supported  by  the  frequent  quotations 
from  the  Pentateuch  by  that  prophet.  We  shall  set  down 
some  of  them.  Hosea  ii,  1,  is  taken  from  Genesis  xxii,  17, 
xxxii,  13;  ibid  verses  9-11,  the  association  of  ideas  of 
Deut.  ix,  14-16,  is  precisely  imitated;  ibid  verse  13,  is  taken 
from  Exod.  xx,  8-11;  xxiii,  14,  and  Numbers  xxviii,  11;  ibid 
iv,  10,  is  an  idiom  of  Levit.  xxvi,  26;  ibid  verse  6,  of  I 
Samuel  viii,  7,  xv,  26;  ibid  verse  8,  is  unintelligible  without  its 
original,  Levit.  vi,  19;  ibid  v,  7,  DH'pbn  nx  refers  to  that  por- 
tion of  the  priests  described  in  the  Pentateuch;  ibid  verse  9, 
the  term  mDKJ  refers  to  Deut.  xxvii,  59;  ibid,  verse  10,  is 
taken  from  Deut.  xix,  14,  xxvii  17;  ibid  verse  14,  from  Deut. 
xxxii,  39;  ibid  verse  15,  from  Deut.  iv,  29;  ibid  vi,  1,  and  v. 


PERIOD     IV.  519 

14,  from  Deut.  iv,  30,  xxxii,  39;  ibid  verse  2,  from  Genesis 
xvii,  18;  ibid  verse  3,  from  Deut.  xi,  14;  ibid  viii,  2,  from  Deut. 
viii,  5;  ibid  verse  13,  from  Deut.  xii,  15,  xxviii,  68;  ibid  ix, 
10,  from  Deut.  xxxii,  10;  ibid  verse  12,  from  Deut.  xxxii,  25; 
ibid  x,  4,  from  Deut.  xxix,  17;  ibid  verse  11,  from  Deut.  xxv, 
4;  ibid  verse  14,  from  Genesis  xxxii,  12,  Deut.  xxii,  6,  ibidxi,  3, 
from  Deut.  i,  31,  and  Exodus  xv,  26;  ibid  12,  4,  from  Genesis 
'xxv,  26,  xxxii.  25;  ibid  verses  13-15,  from  Deut.  xxiv,  5, 
and  Genesis  xxvii,  43;  ibid  xiv,  2,  from  Deut.  iv,  30,  xxx,  1, 
&c.  It  requires  but  an  unbiassed  mind  to  find  in  Hosea  not  only 
the  hortatory  character  of  Deuteronomy,  but  also  the  same 
formation  of  sentences,  attempt  at  brevity,  precision  in  the 
use  of  terms,  and  nearly  the  same  euphony.  We  see  in  Amos 
and  Hosea  the  first  attempts  of  a  poetical  literature  of  the  horta- 
tory character  of  Deuteronomy,  among  which  was  their  pattern. 

While  the  first  chapters  of  Hosea  depend  almost  totally  on 
the  Pentateuch,  the  last  chapters  assume  a  certain  character 
of  originality  and  independence  of  style,  which  the  prophet 
must  have  acquired  by  practice,  and  by  the  progress  of  scholas- 
tic education. 

More  original  and  independent  than  the  former  was  their 
younger  contemporary,  Isaiah,  who  could  not  have  flourished 
before  the  last  year  of  Uziah  (Isaiah  vi,  1),  should  he  have 
outlived  Hezekiah,  as  the  tradition  informs  us,  which  would 
have  been  a  period  of  above  sixty  years.  Isaiah,  as  the  nature 
of  a  progressive  literature  requires,  stands  above  his  predeces- 
sors in  originality,  sublimity,  and  beauty  of  language,  but  he 
has  not  the  boldness,  the  impressive  exhortations,  and  sim- 
plicity of  his  predecessors;  he  often  glides  into  an  elegiac 
style,  which  is  very  sentimental  and  touching;  but  it  frequently 
lacks  that  overpowering  opulence  of  ideas,  which  distin- 
guishes Deuteronomy  and  its  aforementioned  imitators.  The 
prophet  Isaiah  belongs  to  the  beginning  of  the  next  period, 
where  we  shall  treat  of  him  more  at  length. 

Micah,  the  younger  contemporary  of  Isaiah,  was  of  Moreshah, 
a  village  in  the  south  of  Judah.  He  prophesied  in  the  reign  of 
Jotharn,  Ahaz  and  Hezekiah  (Micah  i,  1).  He  must  have 
flourished  in  the  time  of  Ahaz,  although  it  is  said  in  Jeremiah 


520  APPENDIX   TO 

(xxvi,  28),  that  ho  prophesied  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah.  This 
probably  should  read  "  up  to  the  time  of  Hezekiah."  Part  of 
his  prophecies  may  have  occurred  during  the  reform  of  Heze- 
kiah. References  to  other  works  are  less  frequent  in  this 
prophet  than  in  Amos  and  Hosea.*  He  depends  more  fre- 
quently on  Isaiah,j  which  makes  him  the  fourth  of  the  prophets 
in  the  same  period.  His  style  is  nervous,  concise  and  elegant; 
often  sublime  and  poetical,  but  sometimes  obscure  from  sudden 
transitions.  He  commits  the  same  fault  as  Amos  and  Hosea, 
aggrandizing  the  wickedness  of  his  age,  and  speaking  too 
much  in  general  terms. 

Obadiah,  we  may  say,  with  Du  Pin,  flourished  in  the  time  of 
Ahaz,  and  commemorated,  by  his  short  prophecy,  the  hostility 
of  Edom  in  connection  with  Rezin  and  Pekah  against  Judah, 
and  its  recapture  by  Ahaz.  The  fact  that  Jeremiah  imitated 
ObadiahJ  is  conclusive,  that  he  was  one  of  the  earlier  prophets. 
His  mention  of  emigrants  is  explained  by  the  term  kenaanim, 
merchants.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  many  Israelitish 
merchants  emigrated  long  before  that  time  to  different  parts  of 
Syria,  Assyria,  Egypt  and  other  countries.  The  critics  in 
general  seem  to  have  forgotten  that  the  inhabitants  of  Galilee 
and  the  provinces  beyond  Jordan,  emigrated  to  Assyria  about 
twenty  years  before  the  fall  of  Samaria ;  that  those  provinces 
were  for  a  considerable  time  in  the  hands  of  Syria;  and  that 
certain  quarters  were  granted  in  Damascus  to  the  Israelites  in 
the  days  of  Ahab. 

The  five  prophets  just  mentioned  were  the  representatives 
of  their  century  (800 — 700,  b.  c).  The  literary  productions 
of  the  others  have  not  reached  us,  nor  are  we  in  possession  of 
all  the  productions  of  the  former.  It  is  extremely  easy  to 
show  hiatuses  in  those  scriptures,  especially  in  Isaiah.     These 

*  Compare  Micah  i,  3,  4,  with  Deutr.  xxxii,  13-]  4;  ibid  verses  2-10  with 
II  Samuel  i,  20-,  ibid  vi,  4,  with  Exodus  xx,  2;  ibid  verse  5  with  Numbers 
xxii,  5-6,  xxiii,  19. 

t  Compare  Micah  ii,  1,  2,  with  Isaiah  v,  and  Micah  iv,  1-5  with  Isaiah  ii, 
1-5. 

{Compare  Obadiah  verses  1-6,  8,  with  Jeremiah  xlix,  7,  S,  10,  14-16. 


PERIOD    IV.  521 

gave  rise  to  many  misinterpretations.  Still  the  little  fragments 
in  our  possession  suffice  to  convince  us,  that  the  century  just 
mentioned  was  a  literary  epoch,  like  that  of  Augustus  in  Rome, 
and  of  Plato  in  Athens.  The  only  difference  is  that  the  lit- 
erati of  Rome  and  Athens  wrote  for  the  learned  and  the 
opulent,  while  the  literati  of  Israel  appealed  to  the  people  and 
plead  in  behalf  of  justice  and  liberty.  The  former  searched  for 
truth,  and  the  latter  only  advocated  it,  as  their  most  valuable 
possessions. 


PERIOD    V  . 


FROM  THE  FALL  OF  SAMARIA  (3039,  a.  m.,  721,  b.  c.)  TO 
THE  FALL  OF  JERUSALEM  (3J72,  a.  m.,  588,  b.  a). 


BIBLICAL  CHRONOLOGY. 


jiezeKiau  in   ims   periou, 

Menassah  (II  Kings  xxi,  ]),.... 

..55     " 

Amon  (II  Kings  xxi,   1), 

..      2     u 

Joshia   (II  Kings  xxii,   1),.... 

..31      " 

Jehoahaz  (II  Kings  xxiii,  21),. 

3  months. 

Jehoiakim  (II  Kings,  xxiii,  36), 

. .    11  years. 

Jehoiachin  (II  Kings  xxiv,  8),. 

3  months. 

Zedikia  (II  Kings  xxiv,  18), . .  • 

. .    11  years. 

• 

133^  years. 

CHAPTER  XII. 

FROM  THE  FALL  OF  SAMARIA  TO  THE  BATTLE  OF  MEGIDO 

(721—611,  b.  c.) 

Samaria  had  fallen;  Tyre  was  besieged  by  the  Assyrian 
troops;  an  Assyrian  fleet,  most  likely  constructed  somewhere 
near  Mount  Carmel  bay,  threatened  to  attack  Tyre  from  the 
sea  side,  and  Judah  trembled.  Still  no  preparations  were  made 
to  submit  again  to  the  eastei*n  power,  although  a  large  party 
of  the  people  wished  to  do  so.  The  prophets  and  the  psalm 
poets  were  again  as  before  on  the  side  of  popular  liberty,  and 
consequently  they  favored  the  independence  from  Assyria, 
prophesying  the  speedy  ruin  of  Assyria  by  its  numerous  con- 
quests, and  the  dissatisfied  nations  held  in  a  state  of  subjec- 
tion. In  the  midst  of  this  consternation  a  gleam  of  hope 
darted  across  the  horizon  of  Judah,  for,  720  years,  b.  c,  Tig- 


PERIOD    V.  523 

lath-Pilesser,  the  conqueror  of  Samaria  died,  and  if  we  under- 
stand rightfully  the  fourteenth  chapter  of  Isaiah  (verses  1-27), 
he  died  in  the  city  of  Babel.  The  prophet  commences  with  a 
description  of  the  fall  of  the  Babylonian  conqueror,  and  con- 
cludes (verses  25-27)  with  the  hope  that  the  Assyrian  power 
would  be  crushed  upon  the  mountains  of  Israel.  The  death 
of  Tiglath-Pilesser  was  too  important  an  alfair  to  be  allowed 
to  pass  away  without  profit,  which  Hezekiah  well  under- 
stood. He  therefore  made  an  attempt  to  revolutionize  Samaria, 
to  which  end  letters  were  sent  through  all  the  provinces  from 
Dan  to  Bearsheba,  inviting  the  people  to  Jerusalem  to  celebrate 
the  Passah  feast,  the  day  of  the  first  declaration  of  independ- 
ence, which  day  was  best  calculated  to  inspire  the  people  to 
fight  again  for  their  freedom.  But  as  the  time  was  too  short  to 
effect  such  a  convention  on  the  fourteenth  day  of  Nissan,  im- 
purity on  the  side  of  the  priests  was  made  a  pretext  for 
postponing  the  celebration  of  that  feast  to  the  same  day  of 
the  second  month,  agreeably  to  an  express  provision  of  the 
Mosaic  laws  {Numbers  ix,  9-14).  The  king's  heralds  traveled 
through  the  country,  exhorting  the  people  to  return  to  God, 
which  was  identical  with  a  revolt  against  Assyria,  for  to  serve 
Assyria  was  considered  a  revolt  against  Jehovah,  the  only  king 
of  the  country.  The  people  of  Samaria  were  weary;  the  last 
campaign  had  exhausted  all  their  national  resources  and  their 
confidence  in  a  successful  opposition  against  the  colossal  power 
of  Assyria,  a  new  insurrection  might  result  in  a  total  depopu- 
lation of  Samaria,  and  transportation  to  foreign  countries. 
The  greater  number  of  the  patriots  had  been  driven  from  the 
country  by  Salmanessar  and  Tiglath-Pilesser,  wherefore  the 
heralds  did  not  succeed  in  inspiring  the  bulk  of  the  population 
of  Samaria  for  the  plan  of  Hezekiah,  Still  numerous  indi- 
viduals in  the  northern  provinces,  especially  of  Asher,  Menas- 
sah  and  Zebulon,  went  to  Jerusalem  to  sympathize  with 
Judah.  The  Passah  feast,  although  not  altogether  satisfactory, 
still  turned  out  a  magnificent  alfair,  on  account  of  the  great 
number  of  people  assembled  at  Jerusalem,  who  renewed  the 
covenant  of  Israel  with  Jehovah,  which,  as  we  have  remarked 


524  CHAPTER    XII. 

before,  circumstanced  as  they  were,  was  significant  of  the 
determination  of  the  people  to  maintain  their  independence, 
notwithstanding  the  opposition  of  Assyria.  Public  speakers 
succeeded  in  causing  the  patriotic  sentiments  to  arise  in  the 
hearts  of  the  people,  and  to  reanimate  the  natural  detestation 
of  the  people  against  foreign  dominion  and  foreign  worship. 
Hezekiah  himself  contributed  his  share  to  the  extinction  of 
the  ancient  prejudices  between  Judah  and  Israel.  The  priests 
and  Levites  also  were  active  in  making  the  public  worship 
imposing  and  captivating.  All  these  causes  produced  an 
enthusiasm  and  an  unanimity  among  the  numerous  assembly, 
which  had  not  been  witnessed  in  Jerusalem,  as  our  historian 
justly  remarks,  since  the  days  of  Solomon. 

After  the  seven  days  of  the  feast  were  thus  passed  in  pious 
and  patriotic  exercises,  the  people  returned  home  in  a  high 
spirit,  destroying  in  the  country  every  vestige  of  foreign 
dominion  and  foreign  worship,  which  was  also  done  in  the 
provinces  of  Ephraim  and  Menassah.  The  people  of  the 
northern  provinces  could  not  do  so,  for  there  can  be  no  doubt 
that  Assyrian  garrisons  were  placed  there  to  keep  up  the 
military  line  between  Tyre  and  the  Assyrian  cities.  Hezekiah 
on  his  part  did  not  neglect  to  make  use  of  the  prevailing  state 
of  excitement;  he  not  only  stored  plenty  of  provisions,  which 
were  taken  from  the  people  for  the  priests  and  Levites,  as  the 
laws  ordained,  and  kept  in  Jerusalem  and  in  other  fortified 
cities,  but  he  also  repaired  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem,  and 
provided  the  city  with  a  new  wall,  and  with  a  supply  of  water, 
so  that  it  was  almost  next  to  an  impossibility  to  take  Jerusalem 
in  so  short  a  time,  that  the  enemies  of  Assyria  should  not  have 
plenty  of  time  to  unite  with  Hezekiah,  if  Jerusalem  was  be- 
sieged. The  country  was  in  a  state  of  defence,  and  the  people 
were  willing  to  defend  it;  more  than  this  was  not  necessary  for 
the  present. 

Sannacherib,  the  Assyrian  king  who  followed  Salmanessar, 
was  himself  soon  obliged  to  raise  the  blockade  of  Tyre,  not 
only  on  account  of  the  bold  position  of  Hezekiah,  but  also  on 
account  of  the    loss  of  his  Mediterranean    fleet   (vide    Psalm 


PERIOD    V.  525 

lxxvii)  in  a  naval  battle  between  his  predecessor  and  Eluleus, 
king  of  Tyre,  whose  fleet  was  reinforced  with  sixty  ships  and 
eight  hundred  men  from  Phoenicia,  which  is  a  certain  evidence 
that  the  whole  west  of  Asia  was  in  a  state  of  commotion 
against  the  Assyrian  conquerors.  The  revolt  of  Ilezekiah 
most  likely  was  not  an  isolated  event,  as  we  have  noticed  be- 
fore; other  Syrian  provinces  undoubtedly  followed  or  set  the 
example,  which  were  overcome  by  Salmanessar.  But  when 
Sannacherib  mounted  the  throne  the  revolts  were  l-enewed.  In 
Media  and  Babylonia,  too,  the  spirit  of  independence  held  the 
people  in  a  state  of  fomentation,  to  which  the  imprudent  policy 
of  Salmanessar,  transporting  his  natural  enemies,  the  Israelites, 
to  Media,  largely  contributed. 

With  regard  to  the  revolution  in  the  city  of  Babel,  we 
possess  a  fragment  of  Alexander  Polyhistor,  preserved  in  the 
Armenian  version  of  Eusebius,  and  quoted  by  Dr.  Bonomi.* 
This  ancient  fragment  states,  that  the  brother  of  Sannacherib 
wTas,  de  facto,  king  of  Babylonia;  that  after  his  death  Acises 
was  appointed  in  his  place, 'who  reigned  only  thirty  days,  after 
which  he  was  slain  by  Marodach  Baladanus,  who  held  the 
empire  by  force  during  six  month;  he  was  slain  and  succeeded 
by  a  person  named  Elibus.  But  in  the  third  year  of  his  reign, 
Sannacherib  levied  an  army  against  the  Babylonians ;  and  in  a 
battle  in  which  they  were  engaged,  routed,  and  took  him  pri- 
soner with  his  adherents,  and  commanded  them  to  be  carried 
into  the  land  of  the  Assyrians.  Asordanius,  the  son  of 
Sannacherib,  was  appointed  king  of  Babylonia,  after  which 
Sannacherib  retired  again  into  Assyria.  According  to  the  late 
discoveries  of  Mr.  Layard,  this  expedition  was  undertaken  in 
the  first  year  of  Sannacherib. |  Comparing  this  with  Isaiah 
xxxiv,  we  learn,  that  Merodach  Baladan,  the  revolted  satrap 
of  Babylon,  sent  ambassadors  and  presents  to  Hezekiah,  be- 
cause they  were  the  common  enemies  of  Assyria,  but  apparently 
the  ambassadors  came  .to  sympathize  with  Hezekiah  on  account 
of  his  recovery  from  a  dangerous  disease.     The  illness  of  the 

*  Nineveh  and  its  Palaces,  p.  51. 

t  Monthly  Christian  Spectator,  June  185^. 


526  PERIOD    V. 

king  is  also  noticed  in  Isaiah  xxxviii;  but  both  stories  are 
communicated  after  the  Assyrian  war  which  we  shall  notice 
directly,  not  because  they  occurred  after  that  event  (the  terms 
nnn  D^^  are  very  vague),  but,  because  the  compiler  first 
completed  the  prophecies  relating  to  Assyria  and  its  fall,  im- 
mediately after  which,  he  placed  the  story  of  the  Syrian 
invasion;  after  this  he  filled  up  the  vacuity.  Still,  it  must  be 
confessed,  that  according  to  the  Bible,  this  sickness  of  the 
king,  and  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  must  have  been  simultaneous, 
for  the  date  of  the  Syrian  invasion  is  the  fourteenth  year  of 
Hezekiah,  who  governed  twenty-nine  years;  we  also  learn 
there,  that  he  governed  fifteen  years  after  recovering  from  that 
disease.  In  Psalm  cii,  which  was  most  likely  composed  on 
this  occassion,  and  which  alludes  plainly  to  Isaiah  xxxviii,  56, 
those  two  events  are  also  connected.  Still,  this  chronology 
does  not  agree  with  the  late  discoveries  of  Mr.  Layard,  who 
informs  us,  that  Merodach  Baladon,  and  not  the  Elibus  of 
Polyhistor,  was  defeated  by  Sannacherib  in  the  first  year 
of  his  reign.  In  the  second  year,  that  king  undertook  expe- 
ditions to  the  north  of  Nineveh.  In  the  third  year  he  invaded 
Syria,  then  called  in  Nineveh,  Chitthi,  conquered  Tyre  and  Zidon, 
Zidkabal,  king  of  Ascalon,  and  also  Hezekiah.  The  messengers 
of  Merodach  Baladon  must  have  come  to  Jerusalem  at  least 
three  years  previous  to  the  Syrian  invasion,  and  the  disease  of 
Hezekiah  must  have  occurred  before  that. 

Isaiah  first  thought  the  disease  of  the  king  incurable,  and  told 
him,  "Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Order  thy  house,  for  thou  wilt  die 
and  thou  wilt  not  live."  But  a  remedy  was  revealed  to  Isaiah,  as 
he  said,  by  a  special  divine  communication,  which  was  applied 
and  which  cured  the  king  so  rapidly,  that  after  three  days  he 
could  go  to  the  temple.  The  nature  of  the  disease  is  unknown  to 
us.  It  is  also  impossible  to  ascertain  the  precise  meaning  of  the 
terms  mbynn  bx  ' '  The  shade  of  the  scales  which  went  down 
on  the  scales  of  Ahaz,"  erroneously,  rendered  sun-dial.  It 
relates  to  some  astronomical  instrument  not  now  known. 

After  the  king  had  recovered,  the  ambassadors  of  Merodach 
Baladon  came  to  Jerusalem,    undoubtedly  for  the  purpose  of 


CHAPTER   XII.  527 

forming  an  alliance  with  Hezekiah  against  Assyria.  Hezekiah 
received  the  ambassadors  in  the  best  spirit  of  friendship,  show- 
ing them  the  wealth  stored  in  the  public  and  private  treasury, 
and  dismissed  them  with  friendly  feelings.  Isaiah  well  knew,  that 
Babylonia  could  not  maintain  her  independence  of  Assyria  for  a 
long  time,  and  therefore  he  not  only  cautioned  the  king  against 
his  alliance  with  that  country,  but  he  also  reprimanded  the 
king  for  having  made  a  childish  show  of  the  wealth  of  the  state, 
which  could  not  tend  to  any  possible  good;  but  would  attract 
the  eastern  warriors,  whose  avarice  he  well  knew,  and  against 
which  he  often  and  loudly  protested.  Sannacherib,  in  the  third 
year  of  his  reign,  invaded  the  revolting  provinces  of  Syria  with 
the  intention  also  to  invade  Egypt.  The  Assyrian  army 
marched  successfully  from  the  Euphrates  to  the  Mediterranean, 
taking  many  cities,  including  Tyre  and  Zidon.  Sannacherib 
then  invaded  Judah,  entering  this  country  between  the  Medi- 
terranean and  the  central  mountains,  and  on  his  way  to  Egypt 
took  some  of  the  fortified  cities  in  the  west  of  the  land. 

In  Egypt,  where  the  military  caste  was  dissatisfied  with  the 
innovations  of  the  king,  Sethos,  no  measures  were  taken  to 
assist  Judah,  in  order  to  spare  their  own  country  a  foreign 
invasion.  Ethiopia,  then  governed  by  Tirhekah,  one  of  the 
most  distinguished  warriors  of  antiquity,  still  beheld  the 
Assyrians  at  too  great  a  distance  to  give  him  cause  of  fear  for 
his  own  safety,  and  therefore  remained  neutral.  Tyre  and 
Zidon  were  exhausted  by  the  late  wars,  and  again  overcome 
by  the  conqueror.  All  Syria  was  in  the  hands  of  Sannacherib. 
So  Hezekiah  saw  himself  forsaken  by  all  his  neighbors,  upon 
whose  cooperation  he  naturally  must  have  calculated,  and  at- 
tacked by  an  enemy  far  superior  in  the  number  of  warriors  and 
in  material  resources.  Still,  Hezekiah  might  have  succeeded 
in  defending  the  country  against  the  invader,  as  his  means  of 
defence  were  not  inconsiderable;  but  Sannacherib  resorted  to 
the  same  policy  as  the  Syrians  formerly  did  on  similar  occa- 
sions; he  revolutionized  the  depending  provinces  of  Judah, 
Ammon,  Moab,  Edom,  and  others,  which  we  learn  from  the 
eighty-third  chapter  of  Psalms,  which  was  written  undoubtedly 


528  PERIOD    V. 

on  that  occasion,  and  from  which  it  appears  that  the  Tyrians 
were  in  the  Assyrian  army.  If  Hezekiah  had  succeeded  in 
repelling  the  invaders,  he  would  have  been  left  exhausted,  and 
an  easy  prey  to  Egypt  or  Ethiopia,  and  even  if  they  had  spared 
him,  the  depending  provinces  of  Judah,  and  with  them  the  best 
part  of  the  commerce  and  of  the  income  of  the  state,  would 
have  been  lost  at  any  rate.  If  he  did  not  succeed  in  repelling 
the  invader,  he  was  sure  of  sharing  the  same  fate  with  the  last 
king  of  Samaria,  to  be  transported  with  the  best  part  of  his 
people,  to  some  of  the  eastern  provinces  of  Assyria.  Under 
these  circumstances,  submission  was  the  best  policy.  If  San- 
nacherib  overcame  the  king  of  Egypt,  Ethiopia  would  be  com- 
pelled to  fight  for  its  own  safety;  and  Hezekiah  stood  a  new 
chance  to  gain  his  independence.  If  the  Assyrians  were 
defeated,  in  Egypt,  the  chances  of  Hezekiah  would  have 
been  better  to  administer  the  fatal  blow  to  the  army  of  the 
invader. 

Hezekiah,  therefore,  sent  ambassadors  to  Lachish,  which 
city  Sannacherib  besieged,  to  signify  his  submission  to  the  king 
of  Assyria,  and  to  declare  himself  ready  to  pay  such  tribute, 
as  he  might  deem  right,  on  condition  however,  that  he  would 
leave  the  country.  Sannacherib  demanded  the  enormous  sum  of 
three  hundred  talents  of  silver  and  thirty  talents  of  gold. 
Hezekiah  collected  that  sum  from  the  public  treasury  of  the 
king  and  of  the  temple,  adding  to  it  the  gold  plates  with  which 
he  had  covered  in  better  days  the  doors  and  the  posts  of  the 
temple.  According  to  the  Assyrian  accounts  it  was  thirty- 
talents  of  gold,  and  eight  hundred  talents  of  silver,  which  is 
evidently  an  exaggeration.  This  policy  has  been  severely  cen- 
sured by  later  critics,  but  we  consider  it  very  prudent  in  every 
respect,  and  the  silence  of  the  prophets  and  of  the  psalmists  in 
regard  to  these  measures,  confirms  us  in  our  view  on  the  sub- 
ject. The  articles  of  peace  between  the  two  kings  have  not 
reached  us.  The  Assyrian  army  left  the  territory  of  Judah, 
marching  on  Egypt,  after  the  friendship  of  Phelistia  was 
secured.  None  can  say  what  would  have  been  done,  had 
Sannacherib  returned  from  Egypt  victoriously. 


CHAPTER    XII.  529 

Setho,  king  of  Egypt,  arrested  the  progress  of  the  Assyrians 
by  an  army  of  volunteers,  who  would  most  likely  have  been 
overcome  by  the  Assyrian  forces ;  but  no  sooner  had  the  Assy- 
rians crossed  the  Egyptian  frontiers  than  Tarhekah,  king  of 
Ethiopia,  made  active  preparations  for  the  assistance  of  Egypt. 
Sannacherib  on  hearing  this,  left  his  encampments  at  Pelusium 
and  returned  to  Judah,  which  offered  him  the  best  position  to 
expect  the  attack  of  the  united  armies  of  Ethiopia  and  Egypt. 
His  unexpected  retreat  from  Egypt  gave  rise  to  the  myth  of 
the  mice,  recorded  by  Herodotus  (Euterpe,  cxli),  which  was 
connected  with  the  marble  statue  of  Setho  in  the  temple  of  Vul- 
cano,  bearing  the  inscription,  "Whoever  thou  art,  learn  from  my 
fortune  to  reverence  the  gods."  Sannacherib  expected  to  find 
all  the  gates  open  in  Judah ;  but  Hezekiah  had  paid  him  the 
immense  sum  mentioned  before  to  evacuate  the  country,  and 
so  he  had  a  right  to  protest  against  the  reoccupation  of  the 
land.  He  undoubtedly  knew  the  cause  of  Sannacherib's  sud- 
den retreat  from  Egypt,  and  was  determined  to  hold  out  until 
the  Ethiopian  and  Egpptian  forces  would  arrive.  The  fortified 
cities  were  locked  up  before  the  Assyrians,  the  wells  of  water 
were  destroyed  in  all  parts  of  the  country  where  the  enemy 
was  expected  (II  Chronicles,  xxxii,  4);  provisions  most  likely 
were  removed  into  the  fortified  towns,  where  also  the  people 
sought  refuge.  Sannacherib  was  not  only  terrified  by  the  daily- 
expected  approach  of  the  Ethiopian  aud  Egyptian  forces,  and 
was  obliged  to  combat  against  strong  and  fortified  cities  gar- 
risoned by  a  people  determined  to  defend  them ;  he  was  also 
exposed  to  the  most  terrifying  enemy,  want  of  water  and  pro- 
visions, and  only  a  sudden  and  successful  attack  on  the  principal 
points  of  Judah,  or  an  unconditional  retreat  to  his  own  country, 
could  save  the  Assyrian  army  from  utter  destruction.  The 
latter  plan,  as  the  sequel  shows,  was  impracticable  on  account 
of  the  want  of  provisions  to  retrace  the  Syrian  desert,  where- 
fore the  former  plan  was  preferred.  Forty-six  cities  in  the 
west  of  Judah  were  taken  and  given  to  the  king  of  Askalon, 
Sannacherib,  called  Sargon  by  Isaiah,  marched  upon  Lachish, 
which  was  an  important  outpost  of  Jerusalem,  fortified  by  Re- 
34 


530  PERIOD  V. 

habeam.  From  this  place,  which  he  had  taken  and  given 
permission  to  plunder  and  massacre  the  inhabitants,  he  dis- 
patched a  body  of  troops  under  the  command  of  Rabshekah, 
the  cupbearer,  to  summon  the  city  of  Jerusalem  to  surrender* 
Rabshekah  encamped  his  forces  by  the  conduit  of  the  upper 
pool  in  the  highway  of  the  fuller's  field.  Hezekiah  sent  three 
officers  to  hear  the  message  of  the  king  of  Assyria.  Rabshekah 
addressed  them  standing  on  the  city  walls  amid  a  crowd  of 
spectators.  Amid  the  haughtiest  boasting  relative  to  the  king's 
conquest  and  immense  forces,  Rabshekah  demanded  the  uncon- 
ditional surrender  of  the  city,  promising  to  transport  the  people 
to  a  land  which  flows  with  milk  and  honey,  exhorting  them 
not  to  rely  on  the  empty  promises  of  Egypt,  nor  on  the  boastings 
of  Hezekiah,  nor  on  their  God;  for  neither  kings  nor  gods  were 
powerful  enough  to  save  their  respective  countries  from  the 
hands  of  Assyria.  When  the  officers  of  Hezekiah  desired 
Rabshekah  not  to  speak  to  them  in  Hebrew,  as  they  understood 
the  Aramaic,  fearing  his  speech  might  make  an  evil  impression 
upon  the  people,  Rabshekah — of  whom  Dr.  Prideaux  conject- 
ures that  he  was  an  apostate  Israelite,  which  also  the  ancient 
rabbins  supposed — continued  to  harangue  the  people  in  the 
Hebrew;  but  none  answered  him,  as  the  king  had  ordered  them 
to  remain  silent.  The  officers  returned  to  the  king  and  told 
him  the  haughty  message  of  the  Assyrian  embassador,  and  the 
king,  Hezekiah,  sent  the  same  officers  to  Isaiah,  or  to  the  pre- 
sident  of  the  senate,  to  hear  their  opinion  as  to  the  measures 
to  be  taken.  The  message  sent  to  Hezekiah  by  the  prophet,  in 
the  name  of  God,  was  decisive  in  its  efficacy  not  to  surrender 
the  city.  The  senate  undoubtedly  consented  to  this  message. 
Rabshekah,  after  having  received  this  answer,  returned  to  his 
royal  master,  whom  he  found  besieging  Libnah  in  the  south  of 
Judah,  where  Sannacherib  heard  the  answer  of  Hezekiah,  and 
was  also  informed  of  the  approach  of  Tarhekah,  king  of  Ethio- 
pia, Rabshekah  was  ordered  to  return  again  to  Jerusalem, 
again  to  summon  the  city  to  surrender,  and  if  refused  to  take 
it  by  assault.  But  the  advice  of  Isaiah  was  again  the  same 
as  the  first  time,  and  Hezekiah  again  refused  to  surrender. 


CHAPTER  XII.  531 

The  want  of  provisions  and  of  water,  as  we  have  noticed 
before,  not  only  disheartened  the  Assyrian  warriors,  but  also 
produced  in  their  ranks  numerous  diseases.  To  this  came 
yet  a  blast,  as  Isaiah  called  it,  probably  that  pestilential  and 
scorching  wind  called  simoon,  and  the  Assyrians  died  away  by 
scores.  When,  therefore,  the  army  of  Tarhekah  approach- 
ed nearer,  and  no  prospect  was  left  to  take  Jerusalem,  to 
protect  themselves  there  against  the  approaching  army,  San- 
nacherib  was  obliged  to  leave  Judah  and  retrace  the  Syrian 
desert.  According  to  our  sources  one  hundred  and  eighty-five 
thousand  Assyrians  were  buried  in  the  territory  of  Judah,  which 
the  angel  of  the  Lord  had  smitten,  among  which  number,  pro- 
bably, those  are  included  who  fell  in  the  desert  during  the 
retreat  from  want  of  water  and  provisions.  So  Judah  was 
saved  again  from  a  formidable  enemy  (713  b.  c),  as  Isaiah  had 
justly  predicted.  The  event  was  a  glorious  one,  and  was  com- 
memorated by  many  songs  of  triumph,  among  which  we  may 
reckon  Psalms  lxxv  and  lxxvi,  which  refer  especially  to  the 
address  of  Rabshekah;  Psalms  lxxviii,  in  which  the  poet  speaks 
of  the  fall  of  Ephraim  (verse  67),  and  then  concludes  with 
the  wonderful  escape  of  Judah,  Zion,  and  the  house  of  David. 
The  most  beautiful  composition  of  this  nature  and  on  this 
occasion  is  the  triumphal  song  of  the  prophet  Isaiah  (xxxii  and 
xxxiii),  in  which  the  condition  of  the  country  during  the  inva- 
sion, the  fall  of  the  invader,  and  the  consequent  triumph  of  the 
country,  are  depicted  in  the  most  brilliant  colors. 

The  next  transaction  of  Hezekiah  after  the  retreat  of  San- 
nacherib  was  the  subjection  of  the  revolting  provinces,  and  the 
punishing  of  the  leaders,  who  supported  Sannacherib.  Edom 
was  the  most  valuable  of  the  provinces,  on  account  of  its  sea- 
ports, and  the  Idumeans  joined  the  ranks  of  the  enemies  of 
Judah  on  every  occasion.  Hezekiah,  therefore,  was  especially 
severe  in  that  province  {Isaiah  xxxiv).  The  inhabitants  of  the 
rest  of  Arabia  Petraea  were  especially  pleased  by  the  resub- 
jection  of  Edom;  as  they  were  almost  cut  off  from  the  interior 
of  the  country,  which  impaired  their  interests  as  well  as  those 
of  Jerusalem    (Isaiah  xxxv).     This   was  one  of  the  principal 


532  PERIOD   V. 

causes  of  calamity  during  the  invasion,  and  therefore  Sanna- 
cherib  attempted  to  take  Libnah,  which  was  the  port  to  that 
desert.  Therefore  the  prophet  commemorated  the  recapture 
of  Edom  in  two  chapters.  The  best  part  of  Samaria,  if  not 
the  whole,  fell  into  the  hands  of  Hezekiah,  as  the  sequel  shows. 
The  Assyrian  power  was  crushed  in  this  part  of  the  country, 
and  reestablished  only  after  several  years.  Commerce  and 
agriculture  revived,  and  the  land  soon  recovered  from  the  losses 
sustained  during  the  last  invasion. 

No  account  has  reached  us  of  the  last  part  of  Hezekiah's 
administration.  He  died  in  the  twenty-ninth  year  of  his  reign, 
and  was  buried  with  especial  honors  in  the  sepulcher  of  his 
fathers.  The  prophecy  concerning  him,  that  he  would  be  great 
in  peace,  great  in  war,  and  great  in  council  (Isaiah,  ix,  5),  was 
literally  fulfilled.  He  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Menassah 
(698  b.  c),  who  was  but  twelve  years  of  age.  Tradition 
informs  us,  that  Hezekiah  did  not  assume  the  marriage  relation 
before  he  was  sure  that  the  land  would  not  fall  into  the  hands 
of  Assyria,  in  order  not  to  see  his  children  led  into  captivity. 
After  the  retreat  of  Sannacherib  he  took  in  marriage  the  daughter 
of  Isaiah,  whose  name  was  Hephzi-boh,  corresponding  to  the 
English  phrase  J  like  her,  who  gave  birth  to  Menassah. 
This  reckless  youth,  not  comprehending  the  true  interests  of 
the  nation,  yielded  to  the  corruptions  of  idolatry,  which  he 
extensively  introduced  into  Judah,  and  also  into  Jerusalem. 
He  went  so  far,  even,  as  to  erect  an  idol  in  the  temple  of 
Solomon;  the  author  of  Kings  informs  us,  that  it  was  the 
statue  of  Astarte,  which  is  calculated  to  show  us  the  abyss 
of  debauchery  into  which  that  reckless  youth  plunged;  but  the 
author  of  Chronicles  informs  us  that  it  was  the  image  of  Semel, 
which  was  then  an  appellative  of  Mercury,  the  god  of  com- 
merce (Ezekiel,  viii,  3-5).  It  is  probable  that  both  these 
idols  were  erected  in  the  temple ;  for  according  to  the  tradition 
(Sanhedrin,  103,  b.)  the  statue  of  Astarte  was  erected  in 
the  interior  of  the  temple,  and  according  to  Ezekiel  the  image 
of  Mercury  was  erected  at  the  northern  entrance.  This  change 
of  policy  was,  according  to  our  view  of  the  subject,  a  triumph 


CHAPTER    XII.  533 

of  the  mercantile  party  over  the  party  of  the  prophets.  The 
triumphant  party  attached  their  insignia  to  the  temple  as  well 
as  to  every  other  public  building.  Menassah,  who  had  grown 
up  in  the  midst  of  opulence  and  luxury,  and  who  saw  only 
wealth  poured  into  the  country  by  the  enterprises  of  that  party, 
and  being  young,  inexperienced,  and  disposed  to  enjoy  as  much 
of  the  sweets  of  life  as  could  be  obtained,  forgot  that  the 
kernel  of  the  nation,  the  agriculturists,  the  working  and  the 
righting  portion  of  the  people ,  were  attached  to  the  party  of 
the  prophets  and  to  the  laws  of  Moses;  and  contrary  to  the 
policy  of  his  father,  which  had  proved  wise  and  happy,  threw 
himself  altogether  into  the  arms  of  one  party,  which  neces- 
sarily must  have  embittered  the  other.  A  tradition  informs 
us,  that  the  old  and  venerable  Isaiah  opposed  this  change  of 
policy,  for  which  he  suffered  death;  it  may  be,  however,  that 
the  silence  of  the  Bible  about  the  death  of  Isaiah,  gave  rise  to 
the  tale.  Many  of  the  prophets,  as  it  must  naturally  be  ex- 
pected, raised  their  voices  against  the  administration  (II  Chron. 
xxxiii,  10);  they  were  not  only  altogether  disregarded,  but 
they  were  murdered  by  the  scores,  as  in  the  reign  of  Ahab  (II 
Kings  xxi,  16.).  The  law  of  Moses  was  suspended.  Zabaism 
and  despotism  with  all  their  horrible  attendants,  were  imposed 
upon  the  land,  the  patriots  sighed,  and  the  throne  of  David 
was  once  more  defiled  by  the  revolt  of  its  own  possessor 
against  the  laws  which  secured  to  him  that  very  throne. 

Psalm  xciv  appears  to  us  to  be  one  of  the  outcries  of  the  over- 
ruled patriots  of  that  age.  The  fact  that  no  name  is  attached 
to  it  only  tends  to  confirm  our  opinion,  for  it  appears  in  the 
sequel,  that  Menassah  not  only  persecuted  his  opponents,  but 
also  the  writers  of  the  scriptures,  which  had  a  national  tend- 
ency in  the  sense  of  the  prophets ;  so  that  the  ruin  of  Judah 
is  emphatically  ascribed  to  the  wickedness  of  Menassah  (II 
Kings  xxiv,  3,  4),  to  which  he  had  sufficient  power,  on  account 
of  the  wars  of  Hezekiah,  leaving  to  his  disposition  a  disci- 
plined army,  and  a  prosperous  country. 

The  prophet  Habakkuk,  who  is,  as  it  were,  a  powerful 
echo   of  the  royal  Isaiah,  has  left  us  in  his  inspired   speech, 


534  PERIOD  V. 

consisting  of  but  three  chapters,  a  distinct  picture  of  the 
maladministration  of  Menassah.  He  describes  the  injustice 
and  violence  committed  on  the  nation  under  that  king  (I  Habak. 
1-3),  and  also  informs  us  of  the  total  suspension  of  the  law 
(verse  4).  He  threatens  the  king  with  another  Assyrian 
invasion  (verse  6),  and  predicted  that  the  people  would  not 
now  as  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah  defend  the  throne  of  David,  and 
sacrifice  every  thing  to  the  independence  of  their  country.  But 
his  words  were  spent  in  vain,  Menassah  maintained  his  ruinous 
policy,  hastening  the  land  to  the  brink  of  destruction.  Com- 
merce certainly  flourished  under  the  administration  of  that 
king,  and  wealth  was  poured  into  the  public  treasury  and 
private  coffers ;  but  this  only  tended  to  attract  the  attention  of 
the  eastern  conquerers,  and  to  irritate  their  avarice.  It  is  the 
satisfaction  of  the  people  which  defends  thrones  —  not  the 
accumulated  wealth.  It  was  the  law  which  gave  to  Israel 
that  innate  and  indestructable  buoyancy  to  maintain  their 
independence  in  opposition  to  powerful  neighbors,  and  not  the 
flourishing  state  of  its  commerce.  This  the  prophets  well  under- 
stood, and  perpetually  advocated,  but  the  kings  seldom  com- 
prehended it  fully,  and  Menassah  did  not  understand  it  at  all. 
Another  Assyrian  invasion  took  place,  as  the  prophet  had  pre- 
dicted, and  the  people  did  not  rise  as  in  former  days  to  defend 
the  throne  of  David.  .  Menassah  soon  felt  the  consequences  of 
his  error.  The  prophet  Habakuk  called  the  Assyrians,  Chaldees, 
(i,  6),  for  obvious  causes  which  we  shall  set  forth  directly. 

It  is  necessary  to  a  proper  understanding  of  our  history,  to 
take  first  a  short  review  of  Assyrian  history.  Sannacherib 
returned  to  Nineveh  discomfited  and  disheartened  (713,  b.  c). 
He  was  assassinated  by  his  two  sons,  who  fled  to  Armenia. 
It  is  supposed  by  some  that  Sannacherib  governed  but  six  years, 
and  that  he  was  assassinated,  sixty  days  after  his  return  from 
Judah.  This  is  not  only  denied  by  the  best  modern  critics, 
but  it  is  also  contradicted  by  the  late  discovery  of  Mr.  Layard, 
according  to  which  Sannacherib  was  the  founder  of  the  palace  of 
Couyunjic,  which  was  not  finished  in  less  time  than  a  quarter 
of  a  century.     We  are  therefore  inclined  to  follow  in  this  re- 


CHAPTER  XII.  535 

spect  the  date  of  Mr.  Samuel  Sharpe,  that  Sannacherib  reigned 
from  720  b.  c.  to  683  b.  c*  Sannacherib  having  returned  to 
Nineveh  persecuted  the  unfortunate  Israelites  in  his  empire. 
Many  of  the  unfortunate  were  slain  {Tobit  I,  18)  and  were 
denied  a  burial  (ibid  18,  19). 

Media  was  inhabited  by  a  strong  and  liberal  people,  among 
whom  also  large  numbers  of  Israelites  lived,  brought  there  by 
former  kings  of  Assyria,  and  to  which  country  presently  many 
of  the  persecuted  Israelites  fled.  Taking  advantage  of  the 
paralyzed  state  of  the  Assyrian  army,  Media  again  revolted, 
711,  b.  c.;f  independence  was  gained,  the  republic  proclaimed, 
and  maintained,  with  the  exception  of  a  short  interval,  until 
Dejoces  converted  it  into  an  independent  kingdom.  It  was 
not  recorded  what  part  the  exiled  Israelites  took  in  the 
insurrection  of  Media.  Still  their  natural  apathy  to  As- 
syria, their  perpetual  connection  with  the  mother  country, 
which  was  facilitated  by  the  expeditions  of  Sannacherib,  the 
republican  spirit  of  that  portion  of  the  people  which  was 
transported  to  Media,  and  the  direct  testimony  of  the  two 
apocryphal  books,  Tobit  and  Judith,  lead  us  to  believe  that 
they  took  an  active  and  considerable  part  in  the  insurrection 
of  Media.  We  shall  notice  in  the  sequel  that  the  Medes  were 
favorably  disposed  towards  the  Israelites  for  this  very  reason. 

Sannacherib  died  (683,  b.  c.)  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
Esserhaddon,  the  Asordonius  of  Polyhistor,  formerly  viceroy 
of  Babylonia.  The  two  princes,  Adarmelech  and  Shadarezer, 
who  assassinated  their  father  in  the  temple  of  Nisroch,  fled  to 
Armenia,  leaving  their  brother  in  the  possession  of  the  entire 
empire.  The  Chaldees,  the  castes  of  priests  and  of  warriors 
of  Babylonia,  gained  greater  influence  over  the  Assyrian  go- 
vernment than  they  .had  before  possessed.  Therefore  the 
sacred  writers  of  this  period  frequently  blend  Assyrians  with 
Chaldees,  and  Nineveh  with  Babel.  Esserhaddon,  supported 
by  the  Chaldees  and  no  longer  impaired  by  the  never  resting 
Media,  could  direct  his  attention  more  effectually  to  the  west 
than  his  father  could. 

*  Bonomi,  Nineveh,  £c,  p.  72. 


536  PERIOD    V. 

The  Israelites  of  Samaria  and  Galilee  fraternized  with 
Judah.  Although  the  Assyrian  monarchs  did  not  bestow  much 
attention  upon  those  depopulated  provinces ;  still  Esserhaddon 
sent  colonists  there,  on  whose  loyalty  he  could  depend,  from 
different  parts  of  the  Assyrian  empire.  His  object  was  to 
enfeeble  Judah  and  to  open  the  road  to  Phoenicia.  Menassah 
did  not  oppose  these  dangerous  measures,  which  probably  gave 
much  cause  for  complaint  against  that  king.  It  appears,  how- 
ever, that  the  colonization  of  Samaria  had  not  the  desired 
effect,  for  the  lions  who  had  taken  possession  of  the  thinly 
inhabited  country,  greatly  endangered  the  safety  of  the  colo- 
nies. The  friends  of  the  laws  of  Moses  succeeded  in  making 
the  colonists  believe  that  this  terrible  disaster  occurred  in 
consequence  of  their  ignorance  as  to  the  manner  of  worshiping 
the  god  of  the  land ;  they  therefore  embraced  the  laws  of  Moses 
as  the  religion  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  the  country,  although  it 
was  supposed  that  many  of  them  also  worshiped  their  idols  as 
well  as  Jehovah.  This  had  the  effect  of  connecting  them  more 
closely  with  Judah  than  with  Assyria,  which  intimacy  existed 
till  the  final  downfall  of  Judah. 

The  Assyrian  invasion  in  the  time  of  Menassah  is  recorded 
in  II  Chronicles  (xxxiii,  11)  without  date,  and  without  the  least 
vestige  by  which  to  ascertain  it.  The  fact  that  the  author  of 
Kings  informs  us  that  Menassah  died  in  his  wickedness,  while  the 
author  of  Chronicles  asserts  that  he  repented,  after  returning 
from  Babel,  leads  us  to  believe  that  it  occurred  in  the  latter 
part  of  his  reign,  so  that  he  had  no  longer  any  chance  to  re- 
pair the  breaches  which  he  had  made  in  the  nation.  We  there- 
fore suppose  that  this  campaign  is  identical  with  the  one  narrated 
in  the  book  of  Judith.*  The  king  of  Assyria  is  called  there 
Nebuchodonosar  or  Sardochaeus,  who,  in  the  forty-eighth  year 
of  Menassah,  declared  war  against  Arphaxedor  Phraortes,  then 
ruling  over  Media,  to  which  end  he  called  upon  all  his  vassals 
and  friends  to  assist  him,  which  was  refused  him.  He  advanced 
with  his  own  unaided  army;  gave  battle  to  Arphaxed  on  the 
plain  of  Ragau,   overthrew  his  power,   secured  Ecbatana,   his 

*  Benomi,  Nineveh  and  its  Palaces,  p.  52, 


CHAPTER    XII.  537 

capital,  took  him  prisoner  and  put  him  to  death.  Returning 
from  Ecbatana  he  sent  an  army  to  the  west.  Holofernes,  his 
general,  commanded  the  troops,  consisting  of  one  hundred  and 
twenty  thousand  foot,  and  twelve  thousand  horse,  besides  the 
chariots. 

Holofernes  proceeded  westward,  punishing    the  Syrians  for 
their  disobedience,   and  subjecting  them  again  to  the  Assyrian 
scepter.     He  finally   crossed  the  northern  frontiers  of  Israel, 
where   according  to  the   author  of  Judith,   the  people   were 
altogether  united  with  Judah,  and  refused  obedience  to  the  king 
of  Assyria.     Menassah   hastened  with  his   army  to  meet  the 
enemy,  but  being  unable  to  levy  an   army  as  numerous  and 
inspired  as  the  occasion  required,  he  was  routed,  taken  captive 
and  sent  to  Babel  (II   Chronicles  xxxiii,  11).     The  loss  of  the 
battle  was  no  defeat  of  the  nation;  their  mountains,  fortified 
cities,  and  the  brave  defenders  were  not  yet  overcome.     The 
absence  of  the  king  was  not  a  cause  of  anarchy,  it  was  not  the 
king  but  the  law  which  governed  the  nation.     The  threatening 
danger  roused  the  patriots  to  defend  the   country.     The   high 
priest,   Joakim,    or  Hoseah,    according  to  others,  assumed  the 
reins  of  government,  and  after  he  had  sanctified  the  vessels,  the 
altar   and   the    temple,    after   the   profanation   of  Menassah, 
(where  the  author  of  Judith  assumes  the  narrative),   orders 
were  given  by  the  senate  at  Jerusalem  to  the  people  to  possess 
themselves  of  the  tops  of  the  high   mountains,   to  block  the 
passages  through  the  valleys  and  to  guard  them,  to  fortify  the 
villages,    and  to  secure  all  the  provisions,   and  maintain  the 
defensive  against  the  enemy,  which  was  an  imitation  of  the 
policy  of  Hezekiah,  sixty  or  sixty-two  years  before  this.     The 
destruction  of  the  wells  of  water  is  not  expressly  mentioned 
here  as  in  the  invasion  under  Hezekiah,  but  the  eagerness  of 
Holofernes  to  secure  the  fountains  of  water  near  Bethuel,  is  an 
evidence  that  this  stratagem  was  also  necessary  for  their  aid. 
Meanwhile  the  enemy  overrun  the  western  country,  precisely 
as  Sannacherib  had  done,  coming  in  from  the  north,  forming  a 
military  line  from  Abel-Maim  in  the  province  of  Naphtali,   in 
the  north,  to  Bethuel,  a  town  of  Simeon  (Joshua  xix,  4),  in  the 


538  PERIOD    V. 

south,  reaching  as  far  east  as  Dotham,  in  Ephraim,  twelve 
miles  north  of  Samaria,  and  as  far  west  as  Cyamon,  a  town 
opposite  Esdraelon,  in  the  plain  of  Jezreel. 

The  sea  shores,  as  well  as  the  central  mountains  of  the 
country,  were  strongly  fortified  and  vigilantly  guarded.  The 
dependent  provinces  of  Judah  were  not  reached  by  the  enemy, 
which  appears  to  have  been  the  plan  in  the  southward  pro- 
ceeding of  the  army ;  still  numerous  deserters  from  Amnion  and 
Moab,  and  from  the  Syrian  provinces,  swelled  the  ranks  of 
Holofernes  to  one  hundred  and  seventy  thousand  foot,  and 
twelve  thousand  horse,  while  the  deserters  from  Judaic  pro- 
vinces served  him  as  guides  and  informed  him  of  the  territory. 
Another  Ammonite,  however,  Achion,  who  held  a  high  position 
among  his  people,  advised  Holofernes  to  discontinue  the  war, 
as  the  Israelites,  now  united  before  God,  could  not  be  beaten  by 
his  army;  which  advice  was  haughtily  rejected,  and  Achion  was 
delivered  up  to  the  Israelites  of  Bethuel,  who,  however,  treated 
him  with  respect.  Bethuel  appears  to  have  been  an  important 
and  strong  place,  which  Holofernes  could  not  take,  nor  could  he 
proceed  any  farther  south.  It  was  decided  to  blockade  the 
place,  cut  off  the  supply  of  water,  and  thus  force  them  to  sur- 
render, which  indeed  would  have  been  the  case  after  a  few 
days,  had  not  the  beautiful  Judith,  a  pious  widow  of  that  town, 
succeeded  in  coming  into  the  camp  of  Holofernes,  in  securing 
his  passions  and  in  winning  his  confidence,  which  she  used  in 
behalf  of  her  country.  When  at  night  alone  with  him  in  his 
tent,  and  he,  after  an  intemperate  enjoyment  of  wine,  had 
fallen  fast  asleep,  Judith  took  his  own  falchion  and  beheaded 
him,  and  retured  to  Bethuel  with  the  head  of  Holofernes.  The 
next  morning  when  the  people  of  Bethuel  assumed  the  appear- 
ance of  fighting  the  Assyrians,  the  latter  were  alarmed,  took 
their  position,  and  waited  for  the  chieftain.  But  when  they 
learned  the  miserable  end  of  their  general,  they,  as  every 
other  eastern  army  would  have  done  under  similar  circum- 
stances, betook  themselves  to  flight.  The  news  rapidly  spread 
throughout  the  country,  and  the  people  came  forth  from  their 
fortified  villages  and  towns,  pouring  down  from  the  mountains 


CHAPTER  XII.  539 

making  havoc  among  the  fast-retreating  enemy.  Thus  the 
country  was  a  second  time  delivered  from  the  invading  armies 
of  the  then  greatest  power  in  existence.  But  this  time  the 
heroism  of  a  patriotic  woman  was  one  of  the  prominent  causes 
of  the  victory. 

Menassah,  meanwhile,  had  made  good  his  escape  from  Babel 
(II  Chron.  xxxiii,  13);  the  accompanying  circumstances  of  the 
fact  are  not  preserved.  He  returned  to  Jerusalem,  and  there 
found  the  people  under  arms,  the  party  of  the  prophets  in 
power,  the  constitution  and  the  laws  in  full  operation,  the 
country  well  defended,  and  he  saw  himself  obliged  to  submit  to 
the  present  state  of  things.  He  gave  his  sanction  to  the  total 
removal  of  the  idols  and  the  altars  erected  to  them ;  and  after 
the  invading  army  was  driven  from  the  country,  he,  in  fear  of 
another  invasion,  fortified  and  garrisoned  many  cities,  and 
improved  the  fortifications  of  Zion.  But  notwithstanding  his 
pious  prayer,  which  he  is  said  to  have  directed  to  heaven  while 
a  captive  in  Babel,  preserved  in  the  apocryphies  (II  Chronicles 
xxxiii,  13),  and,  notwithstanding  his  change  of  policy,  to  which 
adverse  circumstances  forced  him,  posterity  considers  him  a 
wicked  and  despotic  ruler,  who  was  unable  to  heal  the  wounds 
which  he  had  inflicted  on  his  people.  He  died  in  the  fifty-fifth 
year  of  his  reign,  and  in  the  sixty-seventh  year  of  his  age,  but 
was  not  buried  beside  his  predecessors ;  his  remains  were  de- 
posited in  the  garden  of  his  palace. 

Amon,  the  son  of  Menassah  and  Meshulemeth,  succeeded  his 
father  to  the  throne,  in  the  twenty-second  year  of  his  age 
(644  b.c).  This  prince  reenacted  the  scenes  of  his  father;  he 
again  wrested  the  power  from  the  hands  of  the  people,  that 
just  now  had  saved  the  house  of  David  from  extinction.  The 
commercial  party  was  reelevated  to  power,  their  insignia,  the 
idols  of  Zabaism,  were  again  held  up  to  public  worship,  and 
the  country  was  again  obliged  to  suffer  the  impositions  of  a 
self-willed  monarch.  The  opposition  made  by  the  patriots  did 
not  receive  the  attention  of  the  king;  he  maintained  his  detest- 
able policy,  notwithstanding  the  loud  opposition  of  his  own 
officers,  who  finding  him  incurable,  conspired  against  him  and 


540  PERIOD    V. 

assassinated  him  in  his  own  palace,  in  the  second  year  of  his 
reign,  and  buried  him  by  the  side  of  his  wicked  father.  The 
representatives  of  the  people,  however,  did  not  leave  this 
regicide  unpunished.  The  conspirators  were  tried  and  con- 
demned to  death,  which  not  only  shows  that  the  power  was 
not  vested  in  any  other  person  or  body,  but  in  the  people,  but 
also  that  justice  was  dispensed,  and  the  stability  of  government 
was  secured  against  illegal  intruders. 

The  same  body  appointed  Joshiah,  the  son  of  Amon  and 
Jedidah,  who  was  but  eight  years  old,  to  succeed  his  father 
(642  b.  c).  It  appears,  that  the  conspirators  intended  to  wrest 
the  scepter  from  the  dynasty  of  David,  which  the  representatives 
of  the  people  prevented,  prompted  either  by  their  attachment 
to  the  dynasty,  or  by  the  law  of  the  land  maintained  since  the 
days  of  David,  or  fearing  to  see  the  same  detestable  scenes 
reenacted  in  Judah,  which  disgraced  the  throne  of  Israel  after 
the  death  of  Sechariah,  son  of  Jerobeam  II. 

We  are  not  informed  in  our  sources  who  was  entrusted  with 
the  regency  during  the  minority  of  the  king.  The  high  priest 
Hilikiah,  does  not  play  so  prominent  a  part  in  this  administra- 
tion, as  to  entitle  us  to  the  assertion  that  he  was  the  regent. 
It  seems,  therefore,  that  the  regency  devolved  on  the  king's 
mother,  as  in  the  case  of  Athaliah.  No  material  alterations 
took  place  during  the  first  seven  years  of  Joshiah,  but  in  the 
eighth  year  of  his  reign,  when  he  still  was  a  lad  (I  Chronicles 
xxxiv,  S),  which  is  to  say,  still  being  under  the  guide  of  a  re- 
gent, he  begun  to  inquire  earnestly  after  the  laws  of  God,  and 
the  policy  of  David  his  ancestor;  and  in  the  twelfth  year  of  his 
reign,  in  the  twentieth  year  of  his  age,  we  see  him  first  act 
independently,  in  as  far  as  the  king  of  Judah  was  empowered 
to  act  so.  He  gave  strict  orders  to  remove  all  the  idols  from 
the  land,  to  cut  down  their  groves,  and  to  demolish  and  dese- 
crate their  altars,  which  orders  were  not  only  given  in  Judah, 
but  also  in  Samaria  and  Galilee.  Still,  it  appears  from  the 
sequel,  that  the  orders  of  the  king  were  not  rigidly  executed, 
nor  was  he  himself  sufficiently  aware  of  the  strictness  of  the 
law  against  all  sorts  of  idolatry.     Josephus  informs  us,  that 


CHAPTER    XII.  541 

the  king  was  no  less  rigid  in  his  measures  against  injustice  than 
against  idolatry,  "Moreover,  he  ordained  certain  judges  and 
overseers,  that  they  might  order  the  matters  to  them  severally 
belonging,  and  have  regard  to  justice  above  all  things,  and  dis- 
tribute it  with  the  same  concern  they  would  «have  about  their 
own  souls  "  (Antiq.  b.  x,  c.  iv,  1).  These  facts  show  us,  that 
Joshiah  restored  to  the  people  their  rights  and  liberties;  to  the 
protection  of  which  the  judiciary,  so  much  neglected  and  vio- 
lated in  the  time  of  Menassah  and  Anion,  was  again  placed  on 
that  independent  footing,  which  is  necessarily  required  to  dis- 
pense justice  among  the  people.  These  measures  of  the  king 
met,  as  a  matter  of  course,  with  much  opposition  among  the 
opposite  party,  who  had  been  in  power  for  many  years,  and  who 
were  not  effectually  held  down  during  the  minority  of  the  king. 
This  state  of  affairs  inspired  one  of  the  most  gigantic  charac- 
ters of  the  prophets,  of  the  noblest  patriots  and  boldest 
speakers  of  ancient  Israel.  This  was  Jeremiah,  the  son  of 
Hilikiah,  from  the  priests  of  Anathoth,  consequently,  of  the 
Ethamar  family  (I  Kings  ii,  26),  and  not  the  son  of  the  high 
priest.  His  first  speech  is  dated  in  the  thirteenth  year  of 
Joshiah.  Lion-like,  that  man  rose  up  in  defence  of  the  king's 
well-digested  policy,  he  poured  forth  a  current  of  thunder-like 
admonitions  upon  the  idolatrous  party,  who  sacrificed  the  rights 
and  liberties,  the  religion  and  the  nationality  of  Judah  and 
Israel,  for  temporal  gain  and  enjoyment;  priests  and  prophets, 
and  people  opposed  to  the  present  administration,  or  whose 
piety  consisted  in  mere  outward  forms  and  sacrifices,  were 
equally  and  boldly  attacked  by  the  man  of  the  inspired  words, 
in  every  sound  of  which  echoes  a  great  and  noble  heart, 
beating  only  for  his  nation  and  for  the  land  of  his  fathers.  That 
this  Jeremiah  was  president  of  the  representatives  of  the  peo- 
ple, as  well  as  Isaiah  and  Elishah,  admits  of  no  doubt;  no  other 
hypothesis  suffices  to  account  for  the  almost  unlimited  influ- 
ence which  those  three  men  exercised  upon  the  whole  nation. 
Eloquence  alone,  without  occupying  an  elevated  position  among 
the  official  dignitaries  of  society,  never  procured  such  an  im- 
mense influence  over  a  community;  and,  on  the  other  side,  it 


542  PERIOD     V. 

is  unlikely,  that  the  men  thus  esteemed  and  loved  by  the 
nation  should  not  have  been  elevated  to  the  highest  positions. 
This  alone  accounts  for  their  boldness  and  for  their  care  on 
behalf  of  the  nation.  The  words  of  Josephus  must  not  be  over- 
looked in  this  respect,  "And  thus  he  (Joshiah)  acted,  in  fol- 
lowing the  wisdom  and  sagacity  of  his  own  nature,  and  in 
compliance  with  the  advice  and  instruction  of  the  elders;  for, 
by  following  the  laws  it  was  that  he  succeeded  so  well  in  the 
order  of  his  government,  and  in  piety  with  regard  to  the  divine 
worship  "  (Antiq.  b.  x,  c.  iv,  1).  It  was  the  prophet  Jeremiah, 
who  brought  him  officially  the  instruction  of  the  elders. 

Joshiah,  being  thus  powerfully  assisted  by  Jeremiah,  main- 
tained his  constitutional  policy.  He  was  desirous  of  renovat- 
ing the  temple,  to  which  end  he  collected,  according  to  Josephus, 
free-will  gifts  for  this  purpose,  which  was  done  with  the  inten- 
tion to  ascertain  the  feelings  of  the  people.  The  result  was 
very  satisfactory;  for  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  his  reign  plenty 
of  money  was  collected  to  effect  this  purpose.  Shaphan,  the 
scribe,  Maaseiah,  the  mayor  of  the  city,  and  Joah,  the  recorder 
of  the  king,  were  commissioned  to  complete  the  work  in  com- 
pany with  the  high  priest,  Hilikiah.  On  this  occasion  a  singular 
event  occurred,  which  gave  a  new  impulse  to  the  piety  and 
energy  of  Joshiah.  The  original  copy  of  the  laws,  supposed 
to  be  written  by  Moses  himself*  was  found  in  the  temple  by 
the  high  priest,  who  delivered  it  to  Shaphan,  the  king's  scribe, 
by  whom  it  was  read  to  the  king. 

Since  the  hypercritics  of  our  days  attach  so  much  import- 
ance to  this  event,  drawing  from  it  the  conclusion  that  the 
kings,  prophets  and  people  of  Israel  previous  to  this  date 
were  altogether  ignorant  of  the  laws  of  Moses ;  and  since  some 
of  them  went  even  so  far  as  to  suppose  the  Pentateuch  was 
then  composed  secretly,  and  published  as  the  composition  of 
Moses,  we  must  stop  here  to  make  some  remarks  on  the  sub- 
ject. We  have  proved  that  the  style  of  the  Pentateuch  is 
imitated  and  whole  sentences  copied  in  all  the  books  after 
Moses,   that   its  laws,   religious  and  political   principles   and 

*  Antiq.  b.  x.  c.  iv,  2.     II  Chr.  xxxiv,  14. 


CHAPTER    XII.  543 

institutions  not  only  continually  existed  up  to  the  reign  of 
Menassah,  but  also  inspired  the  prophets  and  psalmists  as 
well  as  the  historians.  It  can  therefore  only  be  asserted,  that 
during  the  reign  of  Menassah  and  Amon,  the  Mosaic  law  was 
thus  neglected,  or  burnt,  as  the  ancient  rabbins  supposed,  that 
no  copy  of  it  remained  at  court.  For  that  no  copy  should 
have  been  left  in  the  whole  country,  and  among  the  Israelites  in 
exile,  is  a  matter  of  impossibility.  But  even  granted  that  no  copy 
of  the  Pentateuch  existed  at  court,  would  not  the  governors  of 
the  people  during  the  absence  of  Menassah,  or  would  not 
Menassah  himself,  when  he  had  returned  from  captivity,  or 
would  not  the  pious  and  popular  Joshiah,  so  much  influenced  by 
Jeremiah,  have  endeavored  to  procure  a  copy  of  it  ?  And  if  he 
had  made  such  an  attempt,  would  he  not  have  been  supported 
by  the  party  then  in  favor  of  the  administration  who  must 
have  been  in  possession  of  numerous  copies?  From  the  words 
as  they  occur  in  the  respective  passages,*  it  is  plain,  that  the 
regret  of  Joshiah  found  its  cause  in  the  fact,  that  his  predeces- 
sors have  not  observed  every  thing  as  written  in  that 
book.*  The  Mosaic  laws  were  in  force,  but  not  everything  was 
done  as  those  laws  prescribed.  We  are  also  informed  about 
the  particular  cases,  which  were  not  done  in  strict  accordance 
with  the  laws.  The  symbols  of  foreign  gods  were  not  only 
suffered  to  be  kept  sacred  in  the  country,  but  also  occupied 
places  in  the  temple,  although  idolatry  was  abolished;  and 
the  symbols  introduced  by  Jerobeam  still  occupied  their  place 
at  Bethel,  and  idolatry  was  practiced  in  the  dependencies  of 
Judah  (II  Chron.  xxxiv,  33),  all  of  which  was  against  the 
Mosaic  laws,  which  permitted  only  the  introduction  of  such 
and  of  no  other  symbols,  which  the  law  specified.  The  groves 
in  which  idols  were  worshiped  still  existed,  and  places  devoted 
to  such  worship  were  still  considered  sacred;  the  theraphim, 
or  house  gods,  the  wizards  and  the  conjurers  of  the  spirits  also 
existed  in  private,  all  of  which  was  opposed  to  the  Mosaic 
laws.  As  regards  the  symbols  of  foreign  gods,  Solomon  already 
laid  the  foundation  to  naturalize  them  even  in  the  temple. 
Jerobeam  introduced  other  symbols,  which  practice  afterwards 

*  II  Kings  xxii,  13,  xxiii,  25.     II  Chron.  xxxiv,  21. 


544  PERIOD    V. 

remained  both  in  Israel  and  Judah.  If  a  king  abolished  the 
idols,  he  did  not  think  it  sinful  to  deposit  in  the  temple  the 
vessels  which  bore  the  symbols  of  foreign  gods,  or  other  marks 
of  art,  which  again  led  to  idolatry.  The  fact  appears  to 
be  that  the  Mosaic  laws  in  regard  to  the  punishment  set  upon 
idolatry,  and  the  practices  connected  with  it,  were  amended  in 
an  early  stage  of  this  history,  probably  as  early  as  the  days  of 
David,  who  found  it  impracticable  to  eradicate  idolatry  in  the 
conquered  provinces,  as  the  law  ordained;  or  in  the  days  of 
Solomon,  who  introduced  foreign  symbols  in  the  temple  of 
God;  if  not  so  early  certainly  in  the  days  of  Jerobeam  and 
Rehabeam  and  their  immediate  successors.  It  is  a  matter  of 
impossibility,  that  the  kings  of  Judah  and  of  Israel  could  have 
so  often  introduced  idolatry,  or  that  the  kings  of  Israel  could 
have  introduced  an  entire  new  set  of  symbols,  in  a  land  where 
the  laws  were  considered  the  only  safeguard  of  the  people,  and 
where  every  thing  points  so  distinctly  to  the  Mosaic  laws,  if 
such  amendments  had  not  been  adopted  by  that  body,  which 
was  entrusted  with  expounding  the  law  to  meet  the  exigencies 
of  the  age.  The  amendments  were  incorporated  with  the  law, 
were  copied  and  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  people,  although 
many  unadulterated  copies  of  the  law  certainly  were  preserved, 
which  most  likely  was  one  of  the  differences  between  the 
parties.  Finally  the  amendments  were  considered  of  the  same 
origin  with  the  law,  and  those  who  protested  against  it  had 
nothing  to  prove  it.  Therefore  Joshiah  left  in  the  temple  the 
altars  of  Menassah,  the  vessels  and  the  works  of  art  of  different 
gods,  although  he  had  abolished  idolatry;  therefore  the  altar  of 
Bethel  was  spared,  although  the  place  was  in  possession  of 
king  Hezekiah.  But  when  now  the  original  copy  of  the  law 
was  found,  the  quarrel  of  the  parties  was  decided,  the  illegal- 
ity of  the  proceedings,  and  unconstitutionality  of  the  amend- 
ments was  evident:  and  therefore  when  that  original  copy  had 
been  read  to  the  king,  and  he  heard  the  downfall  of  his  country 
prophesied  in  it  as  a  consequence  of  idolatry,  and  that 
every  symbol  not  prescribed  by  the  law  was  considered  the 
same  with  idolatry;  when  he   heard  that  it  was  the  duty  of 


CHAPTER    XII.  545 

Israel   to    eradicate  idolatry   and    idolatrous    practices    in  all 
the   lands  which   they  should  possess,   the  neglect   of  which 
would  be  the  cause  of  their  final  downfall,  which  however,  was 
altogether  neglected;  the    king,  a   firm    believer  in    the    word 
of  God,  tore  his  garments,  as  a  token  of  grief  and  regret.     He 
sent,  besides  llilikiah,  the  high  priest,  four  other  officers  of  the 
royal    court  to  the  prophetess   Huldah,   the  wife  of  Shalum, 
overseer  of  the  gadrobe,  who  resided  in  a  suburb  of  Jerusalem, 
to  inquire  of  her,  whether  indeed  all  the  consequences  of  idola- 
try as    predicted  in  the  law,  would  befall  this   country?    The 
prophetess  answered  that   query  in  the  affirmative,   but  at   the 
same  time  stated,  that  it  would  not   come  to  pass   in  the  days 
of  Joshiah.     Right  she  was  in  the  first  point,  if  Israel  and  the 
nations  bowing  to  its  sceptre   had  been  united  by  the  common 
ties  of  one  religion   as  one   language  united  them,   and  as  the 
Mosaic  policy  ordained,  the  nation  would  have   been  powerful 
enough  to  stand  opposite  Babylonia  and  Egypt;  but  now  ic  was 
too  late,  a  large  number  of  Israelites  was  scattered  over  many 
foreign  countries,  and  the  government  was  not  strong  enough 
to    effect    that    extraordinary    measure,     But    as    regards    the 
second  point  (II  Kings  xxii,  20),  she  was  not  well  informed,  for 
Joshiah  died  in  consequence  of  a  wound  received  in  battle,  and 
not  in  peace  as  she  predicted.     The  revolution  in  the  Eastern 
empire,  which  we  will  notice  hereafter,  entitled  her  to  the  hope, 
that  no   invasion  would  occur  during   the  lifetime  of  Joshiah ; 
but  she  forgot  the  intentions  of  Egypt,  which  we  will  soon  see. 
Joshiah  was  not   discouraged  by  the  answer  of  the  prophetess, 
he  rather  took  active  measures  to  enforce  the  law  as  laid  down 
in  the  original  copy  which  was  found. 

A  large  convention  of  the  people  met  at  Jerusalem  by  order 
of  the  king,  and  the  law  was  read  to  them,  after  which  the 
king  made  a  new  covenant  with  the  people  to  the  effect,  that 
henceforth  the  law  should  be  administered  as  laid  down  in  the 
original  copy,  to  which  the  people  consented.  Agreeably  to 
that  consent,  orders  were  issued  to  destroy  all  vestiges  of 
idolatry  and  idolatrous  practices  wherever  found  in  the  city  of 
Jerusalem  and  in  the  provinces  of  Judah,  and  to  read  the  words 
35 


546  PERIOD    v. 

of  the  covenant,  as  the  newly  found  copy  of  the  law  was  called, 
in   all   places   of  Judah    {Jeremiah   xi).     These    orders    were 
promply  executed  in  the  temple  and  in  the  city  and  vicinity  of 
Jerusalem;  also   in   the  country  the  priests  (also   those    who 
served  at  the  heights)  actively  executed  the  orders   of  govern- 
ment.    This  severe  measure,  as  it  naturally  must  be  expected, 
met    with  a  great  deal  of  opposition,    so    that    a    conspiracy 
against  the  government  was  discovered  in  Jerusalem  {Jeremiah 
xi,  9).     Jeremiah   pronounced  the  anathem  against   all  those 
who  continued  to  oppose  the  measures  of  government,   which 
found  a  powerful  and  eloquent  advocate  in  the  prophet  Zepha- 
niah,  whose  eloquent  speech,   consisting  of  three  chapters,  has 
been  preserved  in  the  minor  prophets.     Still  the  opposition  was 
not  silenced,  which  strange  enough  was  very  loud  in  Anathoh, 
where  the  priests  of  the  line  of  Ithamar  resided,  and  in  Beth  El. 
The  king  was  obliged  to  proceed  at  the  head  of  an  army  to 
Beth  El  and  other  places  to  enforce  the  law ;  and  he  succeeded 
in  uprooting  idolatry  entirely,  which  no  more  found  its  way  into 
Judah.     He  also  crushed  forever  the  schism  of  Jerobeam,   and 
extinguished  idolatry  in  the  dependencies  of  Judah.     After  the 
king  had  returned  to  Jerusalem,  he  called  another  general  con- 
vention of  the  people   to  meet  in  Jerusalem,   at  the  Passah 
feast.     The  people  met  at  Jerusalem  in  large  numbers;  the 
feast   of  reconstitution  of  the   nation  was  so  unanimously  and 
pompously  celebrated,  that  the  historians  of  those  days  sup- 
posed no  such  occasion  had  occurred  in  Jerusalem  since  the 
days  of  yore.     For  the  first  time   since  the  days  of  David  all 
vestiges  of  idolatry  were  extinguished,  and  for  the  first  time 
this  was  the  case  in  the  dependencies  of  Israel.     The  party  of 
the   prophets   fully  triumphed,   the   opposite  party  was  annihi- 
lated, and  rose  no  more.     Still  this  religious  political  revolution 
was  effected  in  a  short  time;  its  beginning  and  its  end  is  dated 
in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Joshiah,  which  leads  us  to  believe  that 
the  resistance  offered  b}r  the  opposition  was  inconsiderable; 
the  greatest  number  probably  were   convinced  that  the  book 
found  was  the  original  of  the  law,  and  were  willing  to  obey  it. 
Joshiah  governed  twelve  or  thirteen  years  after  this,  and  no 


CHAPTER    XII.  547 

occurrence  interrupted  the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  country, 
until,  towards  the  end  of  his  reign,  Necho,  king  of  Egypt, 
disturbed  that  peace.  But  before  we  can  narrate  that  event 
we  must  cast  a  glance  abroad.  After  the  defeat  of  Ilolofernes 
the  Assyrian  power  rapidly  declined.  Nabopolassar,  the 
Babylonian  satrap,  one  of  the  Chaldees,  or  according  to  others, 
one  of  the  Curds,  revolted  against  the  last  king  of  Nineveh, 
Chyniladan,  who  mounted  that  throne  about  four  years  before 
the  death  of  Menassah.  In  the  seventeenth  year  of  Joshiah 
(625.  b.  c),  Nabopolassar  was  independent  king  of  Babylonis, 
which  most  likely  encouraged  Joshiah  to  effect  the  thorough 
reforms  in  his  country  noticed  before,  not  fearing  an  enemy 
from  abroad.  The  same  was  done  by  Cyaxares,  son  of 
Arphaxad,  king  of  Media,  who  succeeded  in  gaining  the  in- 
dependence of  Media.  An  inroad  of  the  Scythians  into  the 
Assyrian  empire  is  recorded  by  Herodotus  to  have  taken  place 
at  the  same  time,  which,  however,  deserves  but  little  credit. 
623,  b.  c,  Nabopolassar  marched  against  Nineveh,  which  gave 
rise  to  a  protracted  civil  war.  Finally  Nabopolassar  succeeded 
in  capturing  Nineveh,  and  establishing  the  Babylonian  empire 
upon  the  ruins  of  the  ancient  Assyrian  one.  The  fall  of 
Nineveh,  which  most  likely  occurred  shortly  before  the  death 
of  Joshiah,  made  an  end  to  that  civil  war;  still  the  new  empire 
was  much  exhausted,  and  could  not  enter  upon  a  foreign  war, 
which  encouraged  the  Egyptians  to  make  new  conquests  in 
Syria,  as  we  shall  notice  directly.  It  is  not  likely  that  Nineveh 
was  destroyed  by  Nabopolassar,  it  only  ceased  to  be  the  queen 
of  the  east,  which  dignit}'  was  now  assumed  by  the  proud  city 
of  the  Chaldees,  which  was  three  hundred  miles  nearer  to  the 
sea,  as  Egyptian  Thebes  had  already  sunk  under  the  cities  of 
the  Delta. 

It  must  naturally  be  expected  that  the  Israelites,  wherever 
they  lived,  supported  the  enemies  of  Assyria;  for  which  belief 
we  have  the  direct  testimony  of  the  book  of  Tobit,  who  in- 
structed his  son  to  leave  Nineveh,  which  must  be  set  after  the 
death  of  Amon,  because  both  Menassah  and  Amon  are  men- 
tioned in  the  book  (xiv,    10).     Tobias,  the  son  of  Tobit,  left 


54S  PERIOD    V. 

Nineveh  after  the  death  of  his  parents,  making  Ecbatana,  the 
capital  of  Media,  his  new  residence,  on  account  of  the  prophesy 
of  his  father,  that  Nineveh  would  be  destroyed.  There  can  be 
little  doubt  that  many  more  Israelites  left  the  country  and 
made  common  cause  with  either  Media  or  Babylonia.  The 
words  of  the  prophet  Zephaniah,  when  alluding  to  Assyria  and 
Nineveh  (ii,  13 — iii,  8),  which  were  spoken  at  the  beginning 
of  the  civil  war,  are  another  evidence  of  the  sympathy  of  the 
Israelites  with  the  enemies  of  Assyria.  The  prophet  also 
hoped  from  the  fall  of  Assyria  the  triumph  of  true  religion 
(iii,  8,  9),  probably  being  encouraged  in  his  hopes  by  the  rapid 
progress  of  the  doctrines  of  Zoroaster,  before  which  the  idol, 
their  temples  and  altars,  vanished  among  the  enemies  of 
Assyria,  which  may  have  been  one  of  the  efficient  causes  of 
those  revolutions  in  the  east.  We  next  may  quote  the  shout 
of  triumph,  which  resounds  in  the  short  speech  of  the  prophet 
Nahum,  on  the  downfall  of  Nineveh,  which  event  he  takes  to  be 
a  guaranty  for  the  peace  of  Judah  (ii.  1).  This  prophet  also 
speaks  of  the  destruction  of  the  idols  of  Nineveh  (i,  14),  and 
Nahum  lived  in  Al-Kusi,  near  Nineveh,  where  his  sepulcher  is 
still  shown  in  a  village  of  the  same  name  (i,  1);  he  certainly 
was  well  informed  on  the  subject.  It  is  evident,  therefore, 
that  the  Israelites,  not  only  on  account  of  their  just  enmity 
towards  Assyria,  but  also  on  account  of  the  hopes  entertained 
for  the  safety  of  Judah,  and  for  the  downfall  of  idolatry  in 
the  east,  sympathized  with  the  enemies  of  Assyria,  and  while 
those  in  the  exile  supported  Media,  where  the  doctrines  of 
Zoroaster  best  succeeded,  those  of  Palestine  sympathized  with 
Babylonia.  Still  we  have  no  direct  statement  to  ascertain 
to  what  extent  that  sympathy  was  carried.  Amidst  of  the 
thousands  who  sympathized  with  Babylonia,  only  one  raised 
his  voice  against  every  hope  based  upon  foreign  friendship. 
This  was  again  the  gigantic  son  of  Hilikiah;  he  hoped  for 
nothing  from  abroad;  he  advised  them  again  and  again  to  trust 
in  no  foreign  power;  to  have  confidence  in  God,  and  to  be 
united  when  the  misfortunes,  which  he  thought  inevitable, 
would  break  in  upon  the  land.     "  Then  said  I,  Ah,  Lord  God! 


CM  API  Eli    XII.  549 

behold  the  prophets  say  unto  them,  Ye  shall  not  see  the  sword, 
neither  shall  ye  have  famine,  but  I  will  give  you  assured  peace 
in  this  land.  Then  the  Lord  said  unto  me,  the  prophets 
prophesy  lies  in  my  name,  I  sent  them  not,  neither  have  I 
commanded  them,  neither  spake  I  unto  them;  they  prophesy 
unto  you  a  false  vision  and  divination,  and  a  thing  of  nought, 
and  the  deceit  of  their  heart ?'  (Jerem.  xxiv,  13,  14).  A 
drought,  which  not  unfrequently  occurs  in  Palestine,  brought 
over  the  country  the  misery  of  famine,*  to  which  now  was 
added  the  terror  of  war,  and  of  a  raging  pestilence  (ibid  xiv, 
12-18).  The  cause  of  this  war  was  this:  Pharaoh  Necho, 
attracted  by  the  exhaustion  of  the  eastern  empire,  proceeded  at 
the  head  of  a  large  army  to  the  Euphrates  to  make  conquests 
in  that  part  of  Syria,  to  which  end  he  must  have  crossed  the 
territory  of  Judah.  The  general  sympathy  for  the  east  prevail- 
ing in  the  country  was  certainly  one  of  the  reasons  that  caused 
Joshiah's  refusal  to  comply  with  the  demand  of  the  king  of 
Egypt;  but  besides  this  there  were  still  other  causes.  Egypt 
had  betrayed  Israel  in  the  days  of  Setho,  it  had  not  aided 
Samaria  as  it  had  promised,  nor  had  it  done  anything  for  Heze- 
kiah;  had  it  not  been  for  Tirhekah,  he  would  have  been  left  to 
struggle  alone  against  their  common  enemy.  If  Egypt  should 
have  returned  victoriously  from  the  east,  Judah  would  have 
been  placed  between  the  Egyptian  provinces,  and  would  have 
surely  fallen  into  its  hands;  while,  if  opposing  Egypt,  hopes 
could  be  entertained  of  assistance  from  Babylonia.  Joshiah 
collected  an  army  to  oppose  the  passage  of  Necho,  but  the 
Egyptian  army  found  their  way  through  the  country,  and 
urged  the  king  of  Judah  to  a  joint  battle  at  Megiddo,  which 
Herodotus  by  mistake  called  Magdolas,  a  city  in  the  province 
of  Menassah,*  in  the  plain  of  Esdraclon.  The  Israelitish  army 
was  routed,  and  the  king  severely  wounded,  in  consequence  of 
which  he  died  at  Megiddo,  and  was  brought  back  to  Jerusalem, 
where  he  was  buried  by  the  side  of  his  fathers,  after  a  reign  of 

*  Jeremiah  iii,  0;   xii,  4;  xiv.  L. 

*  Joshua  xvii,  11  j  Judges  i,  27. 


550  PERIOD    V. 

thirty  one  years,  611  b.  c.  Jeremiah  himself  eomposed  an 
elegy,  eulogizing  the  pious  and  beloved  king,  which  was  sung 
by  the  cantors  and  cantrices  on  all  mourning  occasions,  and 
was  kept  in  the  book  of  the  elegies,  which  we  possess  no  more, 
if  parts  of  it  are  not  contained  in  the  lamentations  of  Jere- 
miah. With  the  death  of  Joshiah,  JudalTs  independence 
terminated. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

FROM   THE    CORONATION  OF  JEHOAHAZ  TO  THE  DESTRUC- 
TION OF  JERUSALEM  (611— 588  B.  C). 

The  time  had  come  when  Judah  must  suffer  by  reason  of  its 
geographical  position.  The  kingdom  of  Israel,  placed  between 
Phoenicia  and  Assyria,  fell  under  the  heavy  weight  of  Assyria 
in  its  longing  for  the  Phoenician  coast  and  cities.  Judah  was 
situated  between  Babylonia  and  Egypt,  two  gigantic  empires, 
each  of  which  longed  for  the  supremacy  of  Syria;  Judah  could 
no  longer  maintain  its  independence,  The  power  of  Babylo- 
nia had  just  begun  to  emerge  from  the  ruins  of  Assyria,  and 
Egypt  had  just  undertaken  to  conquer  Syria.  Circumstances 
had  changed  so  unexpectedly  and  suddenly,  that  none  could 
comprehend  them,  none  knew  what  to  do,  or  what  to  refrain 
from  doing.  Only  Jeremiah  appears  to  have  understood  the 
state  of  affairs ;  but  he  was  overruled  by  a  general  confusion  of 
opinions  and  schemes. 

After  the  battle  of  Megiddo  had  been  lost,  and  Joshiah  was 
buried,  the  people  of  the  country  exercised  for  the  last  time  its 


CHAPTER  XIII.  551 

independent  rights  in  electing  a  king  from  the  four  sons  of 
Joshiah.  Among  the  sons  of  the  late  king  (I  Chronicles  ni,  14) 
the  choice  of  the  people  fell  on  Sholluni  (Jeremiah  xxii,  11), 
whose  name  was  changed  into  Jehoahaz.  Not  one  of  the  pre- 
vious kings  had  changed  his  name  on  mounting  the  throne.  It 
appears  that  this  was  a  new  custom  brought  from  the  east. 
This  election  did  not  take  place  immediately  after  the  death  of 
Joshiah;  for  Jehoahaz  governed  but  three  months,  when  he 
was  deposed  by  Necho  who  returned  from  the  Syrian  expedition, 
which  could  not  have  been  completed  within  three  months. 

Jehoahaz,  we  are  informed,  was  a  wicked  king;  but  we  are 
not  told  in  what  his  wickedness  consisted.  Most  likely  he  was 
censured  by  the  prophets  because  he  neglected  to  cultivate  the 
friendship  of  the  king  of  Babylonia,  which  the  party  of  the 
prophets  earnestly  desired  and  which  would  have  been  a  pru- 
dent polic)'.  But  Necho  did  not  give  time  enough  to  the  new 
king  to  take  measures  for  the  benefit  of  the  country.  After 
he  had  overrun  in  a  short  time  the  whole  of  Hollow  Syria  and 
a  part  of  Syria  without  meeting  with  much  resistance,  he 
returned  and  overran  Palestine.  The  prophet  Joel  has  left  us 
an  account  of  that  invasion  in  his  prophecy,  consisting  of  four 
chapters,  in  which  he  says:  "  That  which  the  palmer  worm 
hath  lefc  has  the  locust  eaten ;  and  that  which  the  locust  has 
left  hath  the  canker  worm  eaten;  and  that  which  the  canker 
worm  hath  left  hath  the  caterpillar  eaten."  According  to  that 
prophet  the  Idumeans  played  a  prominent  part  in  the  army  of 
Necho,  the  Phelistines  and  Phoenicians  also  came  to  ravage  the 
country,  and  take  captives,  whom  they  sold  as  slaves  to  the 
Greeks.  The  whole  land  was  plundered  and  devastated,  the 
people  were  murdered  in  cold  blood  and  sold  into  slavery. 
The  people  having  dearly  paid  for  their  independence  in  elect- 
ing a  king,  sued  for  peace,  which  was  granted  on  hard  condi- 
tions. The  king  was  dethroned,  and  being  the  favorite  of  the 
people,  was  sent  to  Egypt  as  a  hostage,  where  he  died.  The 
pillaged  country  was  obliged  to  pay  a  fine  of  one  hundred 
talents  of  silver  and  one  talent  of  gold;  and  the  worst  condi- 
tion was,   that  they  were  obliged  to  obey  a  king  whom  Egypt 


552  PERIOD     V. 

appointed,  and  who  obeyed  Egypt.  Necho  appointed  to  the 
regal  dignity  Eliakim  son  of  Joshiah,  whom  he  called  Jehoia- 
kim,  and  who  was  tributary  to  Egypt  (610  b.  c). 

Jehoiakim  was.  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word,  the  collector  of 
taxes  for  the  king  of  Egypt.  Deprived  of  its  dependencies  and 
consequently  also  of  the  sea  ports  and  the  foreign  commerce, 
and  spoiled  by  the  enemy.  Judali  sighed  under  the  heavy  bur- 
dens imposed  upon  it  by  Necho,  through  the  agency  of  Jehoiakim. 
The  priests  and  Lcvites,  as  always  before,  supported  the 
dynasty  of  David,  which  was  done  also  by  those  who  were  con- 
cerned in  the  Egyptian  trade,  in  return  for  which  they  were 
favored  by  the  government.  But  the  patriots  sighed,  the  pro- 
phets mourned,  and  the  agriculturists  bore  reluctantly  the 
foreign  yoke.  Uriah,  one  of  the  prophets,  gave  utterance  to 
the  dissatisfaction  of  the  people.  But  the  time  of  free  speech 
was  no  more.  Uriah  was  obliged  to  flee  to  Egypt,  where  he 
was  captured  and  executed  by  Necho  to  deter  those  bold 
apostles  of  law  and  liberty.  The  patriots  still  expected  the 
return  of  Jehoahaz  from  Egypt,  to  lead  the  party  to  fight  for 
their  independence  {Jeremiah  xxii,  11,  12),  which  was  another 
cause  of  slaughter  made  among  them  by  the  government. 
Jeremiah  was  the  only  man  who  had  the  boldness  to  speak 
against  those  wo  oppressed  the  people  and  persecuted  the 
patriots  {Jeremiah  xxii  and  xxiii).  He  uttered  dreadful  de- 
crees against  Jehoiakim,  his  adherents  and  accomplices,  but 
it  was  in  vain;  the  king  needed  the  protection  of  Egypt  to 
tyrannize  over  the  people,  who  considered  him  a  usurper,  and 
consequently  the  words    of  Jeremiah  were  not  heard. 

The  effects  of  this  maladministration  were  soon  felt.  Necho, 
who  had  in  the  course  of  three  years  taken  all  Syria  to  the 
Euphrates,  found  his  progress  checked  by  the  warlike  prince  of 
Babylonia,  Nebuchadnezar,  who  was  the  son  and  intended  suc- 
cessor of  Nabopolassar,  king  of  Babylonia,  and  son-in-law  of 
Cyaxares,  king  of  Media.  This  prince  united  under  his  com- 
mand the  armies  of  the  two  above  mentioned  countries,  at 
the  head  of  which  he  crossed  the  Euphrates,  in  the  fourth  year 
of  Jehoiakim  (GOG  b.  c),  to  arrest  the  progress  of  Egypt   and, 


CHAPTER  XII I.  553 

if  possible,  reconquer  Syria.  Necho  went  to  the  army  to  take 
the  chief  command,  and  was  defeated  at  the  battle  of  Carchamish. 
Nebuchadnezar  could  not  learn  the  fruits  of  that  victory;  for 
at  the  same  time  the  king  of  Babylonia  died,  and  the  prince 
successor  was  obliged  to  return  in  order  to  take  possession  of 
the  throne.  Necho  remained  in  possesion  of  Judah  and  a  part 
of  Syria  for  a  longer  period.  This  was  the  time  for  the  king 
and  people  of  Judah  to  throw  off  the  Egyptian  yoke,  and  to  call 
in  the  assistance  of  Nebuchadnezar  if  required.  Jeremiah 
comprehended  the  exigencies  of  the  age,  and  he  exercised  his 
influence  to  this  end  not  only  by  speeches  but  also  by  writings 
{Jeremiah  xxxv,  xxxvi  and  xlvi).  The  people  were  on  his 
side,  and  even  the  officers  of  the  king  were  not  disinclined  to 
listen  to  the  advice  of  the  patriotic  son  of  liilikiah.  But  the 
king,  stricken  with  blindness  to  his  and  to  his  dynasty's 
destruction,  burnt  the  scroll  in  which  Baruch  had  written  the 
words  of  Jeremiah,  and  sent  officers  to  arrest  Jeremiah  and 
Baruch,  his  scribe,  who  did  not  find  them. 

After  Nebuchadnezar  had  arranged  his  domestic  affairs,  he 
again  crossed  the  Euphrates  (603  b.  c.),  at  the  head  of  a  formi- 
dable army,  and  overran  all  Syria  without  meeting  much 
resistance.  Jehoiakim,  forsaken  by  Egypt  and  deserted  by  his 
people,  was  unable  to  offer  an  effectual  resistance;  he  therefore 
submitted  to  the  conqueror  without  trying  his  fortune  even  in 
one  battle.  No  king  of  Judah  or  Israel,  except  Rehabeam  had 
ever  done  so.  Jehoiakim  was  confirmed  in  his  dignity  by  Ne- 
buchadnezar; Jeremiah  and  his  party  were  satisfied  and  we 
hear  nothing  more  of  them  during  the  next  three  years.  But 
when  Necho  died,  and  his  son  Psammis  succeeded  him,  the 
hopes  of  Jehoiakim  revived,  and  he  revolted  against  the  east- 
ern power.  This  was  an  act  of  madness,  which  Jeremiah 
firmly  opposed;  he  was  imprisoned  by  orders  of  the  king.  An 
army  composed  of  Chaldees,  Syrians,  Moabitcs  and  Ammonites 
was  dispatched  by  Nebuchadnezer  to  chastise  Jehoiakim.  It 
appears  (from  II  Kings,  xxiv,  7)  that  an  Egyptian  army  assisted 
the  king  of  Judah;  but  both  armies  sustained  an  utter  defeat. 
The  Egyptians  were  driven  back  into  their  own  country,  from 


554  PERIOD     V. 

which  they  did  not  return  till  the  close  of  this  period.  Jehoia- 
kim  fell  in  battle  (599  b.  c),  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
Jehoiachin,  who  was  but  eighteen  years  of  age.  The  new  king 
did  not  change  the  policy  of  his  father.  The  war  against  the 
invaders  was  continued,  and  apparently  without  the  slightest 
hope  of  success.  The  fortified  cities  surrendered  rapidly  to  the 
formidable  army  of  Nebuchadnezar,  and  after  three  months, 
from  the  death  of  the  late  king,  he  stood  at  the  head  of  his 
army  before  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  which  stood  now  in  the 
midst  of  Judah  as  a  forsaken  widow,  as  the  prophet  Jeremiah 
called  it  in  the  first  chapter  of  Lamentations.  Johoiachin, 
either  forced  by  the  people  or  acting  from  a  noble  impulse  of  the 
heart,  surrendered  the  city  together  with  his  own  person  and 
family  to  Nebuchadnezar,  in  order  to  save  the  city.  The  king, 
his  family  and  superior  officers,  were  transported  to  Babel  after 
he  had  reigned  one  hundred  days.  The  gold  and  silver  of  the 
temple  and  of  the  royal  palace,  were  delivered  up  to  Nebuchad- 
nezar as  a  fine  for  the  revolt.  Ten  thousand  of  the  defenders 
of  the  city,  together  with  the  executive  and  the  legislative 
councils  of  the  king,*  and  seven  thousand  of  the  citizens  and 
one  thousand  mechanics,  undoubtedly  the  foremost  of  the 
Egyptian  party,  were  led  away  captives  to  Babel.  Mathaniah, 
the  third  son  of  Joshiah,  and  uncle  of  the  captive  king,  was 
elevated  to  the  regal  office  by  Nebuchadnezar,  and  was  called 
Zedekiah.  The  Chaldees  evacuated  the  country,  which  bled 
from  many  thousand  wounds,  and  order  was  restored.  It  is 
remarkable,  that  no  acts  of  violence  or  cruelty  are  recorded 
during  this  campaign.  The  first  chapter  of  Lamentations, 
which  appears  to  have  been  composed  on  this  occasion,  only 
mentions  sufferings  and  calamities,  which  befell  Jerusalem  in 
consequence  of  the  war  and  the  siege;  no  cruelty  is  ascribed 
to  the  enemy.  To  this  must  be  added,  that  Zedikiah  was  the 
legal  heir  to  the  vacated  throne,  which  convinces  us  that  it 
had  been  the  avowed  intention  of  Nebuchadnezar  to  gain  the 
affections  of  the  people  for  his  cause.     This  Jeremiah  and  his 

*  Vide  II  Kin^s  xxiv,  14,  "nxa  by  Wolf  Mayer. 


CHAPTER  XIII.  555 

party  well  understood,  wherefore  they  wished  to  submit  to 
Nebuchadnezar,   as  they  were  convinced  that  the  independence 

of  the  country  could  not  be  maintained  in  its  present  position 
between  two  powerful  and  hostile  powers.  Besides  this,  Jere- 
miah, and  probably  many  more  politicians  of  that  age,  were 
aware  that  Egypt  could  not  maintain  the  supremacy  of  Syria 
if  opposed  by  the  united  armies  of  Babylonia  and  Media,  and 
he  prophesied  the  speedy  fall  of  all  Syrian  countries  and  of 
Egypt  before  Nebuchadnezar.  But  he  was  no  less  aware  of  the 
internal  deficiency  of  Babylonia,  an  empire  forced  together  by 
the  edge  of  the  sword  and  held  together  by  the  personal  abili- 
ties of  its  ruler,  which  finally  must  disunite  into  its  original 
parts.  He  was  aware  of  the  inconstancy  of  Media,  which  would 
not  maintain  a  union  with  Babylonia  for  a  long  time.  He 
preconceived  and  prophesied  the  fall  of  Babel,  and  therefore 
he  desired  his  countrymen  to  submit  to  that  power,  and  wait 
patiently  for  the  moment  of  its  fall,  which  was  sure  to  come. 

Had  this  policy  been  adopted,  Judah  would  not  have  been 
exiled,  and  our  history  would  have  taken  quite  a  different 
turn.  But  the  sons  of  Joshiah,  supported  by  a  party  connected 
with  Egypt  by  commercial  interests  and  by  the  priest  and  Le- 
vites,  preferred  an  alliance  with  that  country;  most  likely 
because  they  could  exercise  the  most  despotical  power  under 
the  supremacy  of  Egypt,  to  which  probably  other  promises 
were  added  by  that  country  being  the  weakest  party  in  the 
struggle.  This  policy  ruined  Judah  and  made  a  miserable 
end  to  the  Davidian  dynasty. 

Zedikiah  mounted  the  throne  of  Judah  (599  b.  c.)  as  a 
tributary  king  of  Babylonia,  when  he  was  twenty-one  years 
of  age.  The  enfeebled  state  of  Egypt  under  Psammis  allowed 
the  king  no  hope  from  that  side,  and  so  he  was  obliged  to 
maintain  peace.  But  when  (596  b.  c.)  the  king  of  Media  died, 
leaving  the  country  in  the  hands  of  his  effeminate  son  Astyages, 
and  difficulties  arose  between  the  two  oriental  powers,  originat- 
ing frcm  a  boundary  question,  the  politicians  of  Judah,  Edom, 
Tyre,  Zidon,  Ammon  and  Moab,  entertained  strong  hopes  of 
gaining  their  independence   (Jeremiah  xxvii).     Many  patriotic 


556  PERIOD    V. 

speakers  advocated  a  league  between  those  countries  and  a 
rupture  with  the  East.  One  Hananiah,  son  of  Asur  the 
prophet,  was  foremost  among  those  who  prophesie  I  great 
success  to  that  enterprise.  It  was  again  the  prophet  Jeremiah, 
who,  knowing  that  the  eastern  difficulties  were  but  of  a  transi- 
tory nature,  opposed  the  scheme,  and  he  succeeded  in  convinc- 
ing king  and  people,  that  these  were  but  illusory  hopes,  that 
the  enterprise  Avould  terminate  in  the  misfortune  of  Judah  and 
of  the  captives  in  the  East.  The  scheme  was  abandoned. 
Zedikiah  in  company  with  Elashah  and  Gemariah  went  to 
Babel  to  avoid  suspicion. 

The  agitation  had  seized  also  upon  the  captive  Israelites, 
wherefore  Jeremiah  sent  to  them  letters,  advising  them  not 
to  revolt  against  Nebuchadnezar,  to  be  peaceable  citizens  of 
the  country  of  their  captivity,  and  to  wait  patiently  for  the 
fall  of  the  Babylonian  empire,  which  was  sure  to  come,  and 
which  would  restore  independence  to  Judah.  He  also  com- 
manded his  friends  to  throw  the  letter  fastened  to  a  stone  into 
the  Euphrates  after  it  was  read,  so  that  none  but  they  might 
read  it  (Jeremiah  xxix;  li,  59,  GO).  So  the  storm  once  more 
was  turned  from  unhappy  Zion  by  the  vigilance  of  Jeremiah. 

This  commotion  among  the  captive  Israelites  and  the  letter 
of  Jeremiah  addressed  to  them  was  noticed  by  Ezekiel,  the 
son  of  Busi  the  priest,  who  was  a  man  of  high  standing  among 
the  captives,  and  is  the  third  of  the  three  great  prophets.  He 
assumed  public  functions  in  the  fifth  year  of  Zedikiah,  when  he 
himself  was  thirty  years  of  age.  His  speeches  are  in  the  main 
part  a  faithful  echo  of  the  speeches  of  his  older  contemporary, 
Jeremiah.  He  also  prophesied  the  fall  of  the  western  nations 
under  the  Babylonian  scepter,  and  the  final  and  speedy  down- 
fall of  Babylonia;  and  he  therefore  also  advised  the  Israelites, 
both  in  Judah  and  in  captivity,  to  wait  patiently  for  tlrat 
moment  of  resurrection.  He,  like  Jeremiah,  predicted  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  temple,  and  the  ruin  of  the 
nation,  if  attempts  were  made  to  throw  off  the  Babylonian 
yoke.     Ezekial  lived  in  the  Israclitish  colony  on  the  Al  Habor* 

*Videpage  409 


CHAPTER    XIII.  557 

the  head  of  which  he  appears  to  have  been.  The  peculiar 
style  of  language  in  which  his  book  is  written,  the  strange 
visions  in  which  it  abounds,  and  e specially  its  pictures  of  the 
divine  throne  which  betray  a  Zabiistic  origin,  prove  suffi- 
ciently cither  that  he  was  a  native  of  that  region,  or  that  he 
emigrated  there  when  quite  a  child.  His  knowledge  of  the 
temjDle  was  obtained  from  descriptions  and  verbal  informations, 
and  the  idolatry  of  which  he  spoke,  belonged  to  the  ;  - 
Menassah,  in  consequence  of  which  the  present  disaster  was 
supposed  to  have  overtaken  the  nation. 

Zedikiah  after  his  return  from  Babel  continued  to  acknow- 
ledge the  eastern  supremacy  to  the  seventh  year  of  his  reign. 
About  this  time  Psammis,  the  king  of  Eg}*pt,  died  (593,  13.  c.) 
and  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Hophra  or  Apries,  who  was  an 
enterprising  and  successful  prince.  Hophra  resumed  the  struggle 
against  Nebuchadnezer;  he  took  Gaza  {Jeremiah,  xlvii.) 
fought  a  naval  battle  against  Tyrians,  and  sent  an  army  into 
Phoenicia.  Zidekiah,  after  having  formed  a  secret  compact 
with  Hophra,  revolted  against  Babylonia.  It  was  a  hazardous 
game  which  the  king  of  Judah  played;  the  advantages  offered 
to  him  by  Egypt  must  have  been  considerable,  to  have  caused 
him  to  take  such  a  dangerous  step.  It  appears  to  us,  that 
Zedikiah  acted  on  a  different  principle  from  his  predecessors. 
He  indeed  thought  of  saving  the  country  from  the  foreign 
yoke.  He  set  in  force  the  Mosaic  law  in  regard  to  the  liberty 
of  person,  and  all  persons  bound  in  service  to  others  were  set 
free  {Jeremiah,  xxxiv,  8),  and  he  was  eagar  to  unite  the 
parties,  to  fight  for  the  independence  of  the  country.  The 
secret  motives  of  the  king  can  not  be  ascertained;  but  the 
people  certainly  had  no  other  motives  than  the  fervent  desire 
to  become  independent ;  to  embrace  the  opportunity  offered  by 
Egypt  in  order  to  restore  liberty  to  the  country.  The  inspira- 
tion was  a  general  one;  the  people  at  large  were  under  arms, 
and  nobly  determined  to  die  or  to  regain  their  liberty  and  inde- 
pendence. 

One  man  did  not  rejoice  in  this  general  inspiration  of  the 
people;  he  was  not  carried  off  by  the  current  of  agitation;  no 


558  pexiod  v. 

sanguine  hopes  found  space  in  his  wounded  heart;  and  this  one 
man  was  Jeremiah.  The  hapless,  afflicted  and  despairing  patriot 
was  too  well  aware  of  the  gigantic  power  of  the  East,  to  en- 
tertain the  least  hope  of  success.  He  preconceived  the  dreadful 
catastrophe  of  unhappy  Judah,  if  the  Eastern  Hon  was  driven 
to  the  extreme,  if  his  wrath  was  irritated,  and  a  dissolution  of 
the  nation  deemed  necessary.  Jeremiah  boldly  denounced  the 
league  with  Egypt  and  the  revolt  against  Babylonia.  His  tears 
must  have  reached  the  hearts  of  his  audience,  his  words  must 
have  rushed  thunder-like  through  the  multitude  whom  he  ad- 
dressed; for  he  was  imprisoned  because  deemed  dangerous. 

In  the  ninth  year  of  Zedikiah  (590  b.  c),  the  army  of 
Nebuchadnezar  came  to  Palestine,  to  enforce  obedience.  Every 
city  was  garrisoned  and  every  one  could  be  taken  by  assault  only ; 
but  one  after  the  other  fell  before  the  enemy.  The  king  entreated 
Jeremiah  to  pray  to  the  Lord  for  the  suffering  country,  to  predict 
success,  that  he  might  set  him  free;  but  Jeremiah  did  not  change 
his  views,  nor  could  he  be  persuaded  to  speak  what  he  did  not 
believe.  Only  his  spotless  character,  his  acknowledged  autho- 
rity, and  the  gray  hairs  sparingly  covering  his  head,  saved  him 
from  the  fury  of  the  agitated  warriors ;  he  sighed  away  his 
days  in  a  prison,  awaiting  with  terror  the  catastrophe  which  he 
had  predicted. 

The  enemy  forced  its  way  through  the  country,  and  the 
tenth  day  of  the  tenth  month  (Tebcth,  January),  the  army  of 
Nebuchadnezar  appeared  before  Jerusalem,  the  siege  of  which 
was  now  commenced  and  continued  for  nineteen  months,  inter- 
rupted only  for  a  short  time  by  the  following  event.  The  king 
of  Egypt  came  with  an  army  to  assist  Jerusalem,  but  was  de- 
feated by  the  troops  of  Nebuchadnezar.  All  the  different 
detachments  of  that  powerful  army  were  concentrated  before 
Jerusalem.  The  city  was  thus  hemmed  in,  so  that  no  provisions 
could  be  procured  by  the  besieged.  Famine,  and  pestilence 
raged  within  the  city  to  an  alarming  degree,  still  none  thought 
of  surrendering ;  nor  could  the  besieging  army  succeed  by  any 
method  of  attack  then  known,  in  making  a  breach  in  the  wall, 
or  in  taking  it  by  storm.    The  city  held  out  to  the  eleventh  year 


CHAPTER    XIII.  559 

of  Zedikiah  (588  b.  c).  On  the  ninth  clay  of  the  fourth  month 
(Tamuz,  July)  of  that  year,  the  besieging  army  succeeded  in 
taking  the  outer  walls  of  the  city  {Jeremiah  xxxix),  and, 
finally,  also  Mount  Zion,  the  City  of  David.  But  the  king  and 
his  officers,  and  his  guard,  had  fled  previously  through  a  secret 
gate.  The  king  made  his  escape  towards  the  plain  of  Jericho.  But 
pursued  by  the  Chaldees  and  deserted  by  his  guard,  he  was 
overtaken  and  brought  captive  before  the  king  of  Babylonia  at 
Riblah.  He  was  dreadfully  punished  for  his  revolt.  His  sons 
were  killed  before  his  face,  after  which  his  eyes  were  blinded, 
and  in  company  with  his  friends,  he  was  transported  to  Babel, 
and  condemned  to  die  in  prison. 

Zion  was  taken,  the  royal  palace  and  the  house  of  the  peo- 
ple were  burnt  down,  the  outer  walls  destroyed,  and  no  hope 
dawned;  still,  the  people  held  out  in  the  city  until  the  tenth 
day  of  the  fifth  month  (Ab,  August),  when  Nebuzradon,  the 
general  of  Nebuchadnezar,  succeeded  in  taking  the  city.  The 
temple,  together  with  all  public  buildings,  were  plundered  and 
set  on  fire;  the  walls  of  the  city  were  razed;  those  of  the  people 
who  had  escaped  starvation,  the  pestilence,  and  the  sword  of 
the  enemy,  were  led  away  in  captivity.  The  high  priest  and 
his  proxy,  the  military  commander  of  the  city,  the  seven  coun- 
sellors of  the  king  and  his  scribe,  were  executed  at  Riblah.  The 
vessels  of  the  temple  were  brought  to  Babel.  None  but  the 
agriculturists,  the  party  of  the  prophets,  were  left  in  the  country, 
which  was  stripped  of  all  its  wealth  and  of  all  means  of  again 
revolting.  Gedaliah,  son  of  Ahikam,  was  appointed  governor  of 
Judah,  which  now  was  a  province  of  Babylonia.  Jeremiah  was 
taken  from  his  prison,  and  was  among  those  who  were  trans- 
ported; but  when  at  Raman,  he  was  set  at  liberty  by  Nebuzradon. 
The  choice  was  left  with  the  prophet  to  stay  in  the  country  or 
to  go  to  Babel,  the  former  of  which  he  preferred;  he  went 
back  to  weep  upon  the  ruins  of  his  beloved  city.  The  sighs  of  the 
greatest  heart  that  ever  beat  in  a  manly  breast  were  converted 
into  the  words  composing  the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah.  The 
seventy-ninth  psalm  is  a  painful  but  faint  echo  of  those  un- 
rivalled tunes  of  a  broken  lyre,  of  a  weeping  bard,  of  a  despairing 


5G0  PERIOD     V. 

patriot,  of  an  afflicted  man,  who  exerts  his  last  strength  to  give 
utterance  to  his  pain  and  grief. 

Israel  had  maintained  its  nationality  for  nine  centuries ;  for 
the  most  of  the  time  it  was  a  free,  independent  and  happy  nation. 
It  fell  heroically  under  the  blows  of  a  power  which  it  could 
not  effectually  resist.  It  had  produced  the  greatest  characters 
of  antiquity,  and  left  a  wonderful  history  to  posterity.  Judah's 
sin  was  its  obstinacy  against  the  national  council  in  Shechem 
after  the  death  of  Solomon;  and,  subsequently,  its  unwilling- 
ness to  bear  the  yoke  of  Babylonia  any  longer.  But  who  dare 
condemn  a  nation  for  preferring  death  to  dependency!  Israel 
existed  gloriously,  and  fell  heroically. 


' 


■ 

! 


I 


t1  ~  &3 


\L**\ 


■  K 


* 


4-v 


I* 


BS1197.W81 

History  of  the  Israelitish  nation,  from 

Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00029  2252 


y     (a:-T, 


m 


ill 


i||';U    \  W 


i    ■ 

■■'    !  ■ 
!    i 

I1 

\        "      [f          ill  if      ■ ;. ;' ';/      'v-  .:•• 

*,    " 


